Basic story is 1/4th of men wants to extend compulsary military service to women in these modern times and only about 1/10th of women agree. (Odd how they had it in fractions not in % though)
What would such numbers be for your flag be on matter like this? I think i feel pretty content if it is 10%, and maybe rising!
Equality is a cruel mistress.
Ah yes also here some thematically correct art.
That's fucking retarded. Women are not suitable for armed service in the first place. All this would do is weaken our national defense.
In order to be eligible for the rights and privileges of being a US citizen, I have to sign up for the selective service when I turn 18 because I am a man. If I refuse to sign this and the government finds out I did not sign it, I can have those rights taken away and face various charges, which could potentially lead to fines, services rendered to the community, or a conviction to a prison.
Women are handed these rights and privileges with nothing asked of them and they have no worries of being thrown into jail for not signing up for a draft.
It's not that I'm upset about women not being part of the draft, to be perfectly honest they shouldn't be in the armed forces at ALL. It just gets silly when women and numales walk around shouting for "equality" when what they demand and cry for is not equality, but instead supremacy and access to more rights and a higher legal standing than men.
Women and men should have the same rights and the same opportunity to express themselves as allowed by law, but one should not be given preferential treatment because of their sex.
>tacticool kneepads
Well there could easily be resurgence of some historical branch sunch as Lotta-Svärd but with a bit more teeths and shootings?
I know some women who likely would keep up with the non-peak soldiers in correct positions, i mean let us face it. Strenght in numbers, and compulsary service leans on the said numbers.
Peak-Soldiers can still be had.
Only place is field canteen for them.
Remember man can do everything in military better than women.
>I know some women who likely would keep up with the non-peak soldiers in correct positions
You mean like a couple hundred in the entire nation? The average man is far above women in strength, coordination and general physical capability, nevermind the tribal mentality, innate pack coordination and other things women just lack.
Put ten guys in a forest in adverse conditions and they bond and become a unit. Put ten women in adverse conditions and they bitch and cry and fight and accomplish nothing.
>Strenght in numbers, and compulsary service leans on the said numbers.
No it doesn't, not in the way you imagine it. Even now roughly 70 % of men serve in the military and there are very few women who could genuinely outperform even those men who couldn't make it through.
>Peak-Soldiers can still be had
Fuck the combat support, right? Not like we need them to perform well or anything.
Women are better at fucking around though.
shouldn't have the right to vote if you cannot be conscripted to defend the country
voting for other people to fight and die for you is criminal
And stealing tax money without representation is criminal as well.
>Second level education lasts another 1 to 2 years, with guns.
Conscription is cruel.
Not all women are idiotic bitches and can pull in as a team, most are not used to pushing themselves but they can do it if properly motivated.
And yes physically most men will outperform but that performance is not all in all. There are a lot of defence situations and roles which require more of a finesse and sound mind thant brute physical force.
Sure we need medics which can carry people but it does not mean they need to work alone by doing so.
>Not all women
And compromising our national defense for the sake of these not-all-women is not worth it.
>most are not used to pushing themselves but they can do it if properly motivated.
If properly motivated? There should be no such IFs in the military. If they are not capable of pushing themselves as is, then they do not belong in the military. That's it.
>There are a lot of defence situations and roles which require more of a finesse and sound mind thant brute physical force.
And men are superior in those aspects as well. Sound of mind? Women? Surely you're joking. Have you seen the average woman's reaction to a dangerous situation?
Panic, scream and do nothing useful.
Women, by nature, are not suited for military work and that is it. No amount of 21st century equality lies will change that fact.
>80
>
>>I know some women who likely would keep up with the non-peak soldiers in correct positions
>You mean like a couple hundred in the entire nation? The average man is far ab
Hahahaha.
> Have top elite ground soldier.
> Have mentally ill trannies and retarded woman on support roles.
> The support is suboptimal.
> All your elite ground troops die horrible.
SHiiiiiiiiet.
Come on dude. All those girl just want to play to.
>What is the moral difference, if any, between a civilian and a citizen?
>A citizen accepts personal responsibility for the safety and the body politic defending it with his life. A civilian does not.
Poland got rid of conscription a few years ago, but if we brought it back, then I am sure both sexes would be drafted. Polish girls are very interested in military and often volunteer for various reserve training programs. We are currently starting that "Academic Legion" program and there is a lot of female volunteers on my university.
>this
We have this cunt who limps around the barracks and the bitch is going to be Alikersantti for the sake of diversity and equality.
Starship troopers was a movie mocking that kind of thinking and the book was juvenile.
What, just Alikersantti? Are you sure she won't be a fucking Koksu with some bullshit affirmative action?
Service to ones country should be mandatory, chicks can volunteer in other workspaces and so can men, just make it so that those last longer.
Speaking for my country, a lot of retirement homes and elderly that need to be taken care of or other work that can be done.
The fact people don't want it or chicks want it less so is irrelevant. Bring back coercive measures to keep them in line or find another task for them fulfill. Women in general would make horrible infantry anyways, damned what any SJW will tell you.
If they want equality they have to be conscripted too. No point crying when this is what you asked for.
Perfect
we'll take away the female right to vote and the right to work
now they don't get drafted, can't vote for wars, and don't pay any taxes
desu I don't know why feminists "progressed" out of that state of affairs, it's like having paradise and going "NO ITS TOO GOOD MAKE IT WORSE"
No matter how much Verhoeven tried to make it satire you just can't turn a 100% legit thing into a satire. Movie was still fucking perfect. Verhoeven 0, Heinlein 1.
She's been more into veksiin than the shooting range, never once did she went to lieri either, and the cunt is about to go Alik, and the worst is, she's a total pain in the ass. Glad we don't have this cunts in P-kausi at 1JK.
>if they want to destroy society we should let them
We had cunt like that in AUK too. Bitch fucking forgot half of her squad in woods. My squad was last to eat so we got to näätä. Then this cunt came back with her squad informing btw half of my squad have not eaten yet. Well sucks for you. Your angry troops are now hungry and angry, have fun. She almost went to RUK but our NCO torpedoed her by telling our CO that now we will lose a squad in war but she's going to RUK we will lose a whole platoon in war.
Heinlein made books for teenagers and verhoven made a great film. He mixed action with parody. The political messages are dumb as fuck. They only hold water if you can trust a military to serve the populace. We know that never happens. The populace ends up serving the ambitions of the military.
ssshhh that's not what the lesson was. The great teaching were:
1. Something given has no value
2. You have to prove you're worthy to serve your state and people
And best of them all
3. The more you have responsibilities the more fierce is the punishment for failing your duties
Total opposite what we have now.
The morons don't vote. Voting is a both a right and a responsibility.
>They only hold water if you can trust a military to serve the populace. We know that never happens
Stop projecting your potatonigger society onto others, k?
>Finland
>Potato niggers that starved when throttle potato crops failed
>Calling other's potato niggers
Lel.
>zog army half women
Funny, I once had this conversation with my girlfriend, told her if she wants to truly be equal then go on the selective services site and register. She got so mad at me for that one.
Remove throttle.
Yes, right thru citizenship gained by taking personal responsibility for safety and body politic.
pfft who needs potatoes when you can eat pine bark and call it a bread.
Close, but no. Women should not have equal rights to men. Perhaps you could say that if the preferential treatment was completely gone then it wouldent matter, but I would rather this evil be stomped out that let to flicker.
That doesn't work though. People are self interested assholes. As soon as you allow some to vote but not others, they vote advantages to themselves. We already have half of people (the laziest) not voting. The system works. If anything the problem is that the smartest voters still arnt smart enough. Military service would not improve that.
I refuse to accept your reasoning
I imagine many of the men and women of my country believe that having women on the front lines instead of where they really shine (in politics and more) would be a vast misallocation of resources.
Luckily for us our system allows both sides to be largely sated - the outliers most people bring up, women who want to serve can now serve if they're as good as a man. Mulan for everyone, but we still respect that women are women, and men are men.
Don't believe me? Guess why Nikki Haley gets her spot? Merit.
I would enjoy learning military craft but I don't want to be forced into it with school boys.
Women shouldn't be in the army. It's no good for them and no good for the male soldiers.
They should be safe at home, rasing the kids, like it always been.
It's almost like you haven't read the book my potatofriend.
It addresses that exact point by suggesting that the people ARE the government.
They can't just waltz on into office by being billionaires or having a wide smile and a wider vagina.
They have to have sacrificed already in order to get into office, thus weeding out the weasely ((bureaucrats)) that cause so much strife in our governments.
That's why it's juvenile. It automatically assumes a higher standard of behavior from military people. We know from all of human history that this would not be the case. Only a teenage boy could still believe in authority to the extent that he heinlein does.
Everyone knows that it's a pants on head retarded. Even the women that willingly do service have a hard time following the weakest of men. Biological truths can not be ignored.
In a conventional warfare setting, not even all men would be sent to the front. Mostly 20-30-year old men. Not even all from them. There is little practical use from having women learn guns. Very basic teaching could be used to make them less afraid of guns which in practice would result in a population that is more positive towards guns. A pro-gun population is a free population.
Educational training that would teach women to be traditional would be cool though.
Having women in the army is a perfect way of permanently crippling your armed forces. Already females turned workplace and the academia into a glorified high school. War is a masculine activity after all.
It's not about military being the cause of authority but rather that demanding a sacrifice of a civilian will teach them the weight of their responsibility.
If you'd offered an objection to the effect of such a mentality requiring perpetual war, then it might be fair.
But instead you're basing your assumptions on how we currently have things - military being only the sword welded by bureaucrats.
His point was that there needs to be a price paid for particular rights, and that any rights that carry with them certain political weight require a greater sacrifice.
People now (and in his time) had no concept of the power they wild politically, since they haven't ever had to do anything to earn it.
He is arguing against all the 1st year college kids who are oh so political, without ever having had to do anything to earn that political power.
Or the ghetto nigs that still get the same vote you do, despite spending their lives basically ripping you off through welfare.
If you take the military aspect out, and substitute in other public sector work, like teaching, medicine, firefighting etc, his arguments still stand.
I'm not saying I agree with the exact line of thinking, but don't mischaracterise the main theme of the novel.
>Everyone knows that it's a pants on head retarded. Even the women that willingly do service have a hard time following the weakest of men. Biological truths can not be ignored.
but we need more and more computer operators for modern war
biology is irrelevant
I mean look at the USA. 2% minority have full control over media, banks, legislation and courts. Only thing they do not control from the inside is the military, but they don't have to, because they are in control of the areas that make the decisions for the military. With SST system we would have none of that kikery. Rootless international clique is not fit to serve.
getting rid of conscription was retarded and so are women in military
there is a much more ways to serve a country than just military, women could do some other shit
has a right idea
(((Who))) would want that?
You are a citizen, you pay taxes, you obey the laws and you vote in your self interest. That is how democracy works. You couldn't ask people to obey laws and pay taxes and not give them the vote. That is the juvenile part of heinleins military society. People would rightly over throw the military government one way or another.
There is nothing wrong with suggesting that people take the rights and responsibilities of citizenship more seriously but his suggestion on how to accomplish that is foolish.
I think you've really hit the nail on the head there.
Mandatory care of old folks is something that so many liberals would baulk at, yet these are the same people trying their best to show how virtuous they are with their rainbow and French flag Facebook photo filters, and all their meaningless hash tags.
Ironically the most kind, caring and conscientious folk I know, the types that actually do volunteer their time to help people, are fairly right wing.
Women shouldn't have different requirements for acceptance or draft requirements than men. If women can't hack frontline duty, then don't put them at the front. Have them push pencils, do surgeries far behind the line, and leave the front to men.
Right!
Sorry man, I misread your comment as meaning that you disagreed that people should be expected to actually value their rights.
I certainly think there should be some price to pay for voting rights, perhaps not military service, but certainly community assistance etc.
Then again, I generally think we are far too fucked to ever have some sort of change if that scope at this point, without a massive upheaval first.
People are far too selfish, flaky and generally vapid by and large.
That's humans. We are flawed. Do we throw the whole thing out? Simply asking people to register to vote and turn up on a date removes about half of voters. That seems to take out the trash efficiently enough for me. Further reducing the number of voters and creating more obsticles would lead to inefficiency, in my opinion. Too much power in too small a groups hands. The temptation to abuse it would over come them. We have seen it time and again.