- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Posted on 6/17/16 at 10:56 am to Bmath
You're the dim one. The first two words in the message were FOR COMBAT. You obviously can't or don't read. And, your original post absolutely indicated women could/should be in non-combat positions. Again, you can't/don't read well because the Senate and the SOC recently stated in no uncertain terms that women will be drafted and used in combat. English is your friend.
Posted on 6/17/16 at 10:57 am to UKWildcatsFAN
quote:
That's a fantacy.
quote:
This post was edited on 6/17 at 10:51 am
I think you weren't done editing that post
This post was edited on 6/17/16 at 10:59 am
Posted on 6/17/16 at 10:58 am to tiger81
quote:
women born on or after January 1, 2018
What??? So it's not going to affect any body until 2036? How progressive.
Posted on 6/17/16 at 11:00 am to LNCHBOX
quote:
And women signing up for the draft is stupid. There are physiological reasons why women would be terrible in combat. The genders aren't equal, especially in this case.
This doesn't matter. There was already a law passed that say women are eligible to serve any roll in the military.
Posted on 6/17/16 at 11:04 am to tiger81
quote:
You obviously can't or don't read.
I explained to you that not everyone reads the OP if the title appears to stand on its own.
quote:
And, your original post absolutely indicated women could/should be in non-combat positions.
I've already explained my position here, and I later clarified how I felt in response to you pointing out that there was a bit more detail to the original question.
quote:
Again, you can't/don't read well because the Senate and the SOC recently stated in no uncertain terms that women will be drafted and used in combat. English is your friend.
Well, then why did you ask for an opinion? Just because they ruled a certain way means I have to 100% agree with it? Are you retarded or do you just not understand how to have a discussion?
Again, learn how to start a thread. It's not too late to edit your title.
Posted on 6/17/16 at 11:23 am to Bmath
For those with eyes, my title is fine. If you are too lazy or incapable of reading, that would be your problem. The issue which you can't seem to grasp is what people think about women being drafted for COMBAT. Your attempt to turn it into "women can weasel out and choose not to fight" is your own somewhat delusional thread which flies in the face of the Senate, SOD, and the liberal/pinko agenda. See Spot Run.
This post was edited on 6/17/16 at 11:26 am
Posted on 6/17/16 at 11:25 am to tiger81
Equality.
And females of all other species pull their weight in battle. Don't see why ours should be excluded if it became necessary.
And females of all other species pull their weight in battle. Don't see why ours should be excluded if it became necessary.
Posted on 6/17/16 at 11:26 am to tiger81
DP
This post was edited on 6/17/16 at 11:27 am
Posted on 6/17/16 at 11:35 am to tiger81
quote:
If you are too lazy
It's a message board with hundreds of posts. To cover a lot of ground on here takes efficiency. This is why when posters write long drawn out stories you see a lot of TLDR responses.
You keep bringing the ad hominem attack because you are too dense to understand that my explanation boils down to women in combat should not be a black and white issue. That's simply an opinion, which you asked for, and doesn't need to be based on current policy.
It's really sad that you are quick to label me instead of hearing what I have to say and offer a counterpoint. That's how you have a discussion, but alas you are only able to see red at the moment.
quote:
Your attempt to turn it into "women can weasel out and choose not to fight" is your own somewhat delusional thread which flies in the face of the Senate, SOC, and the liberal/pinko agenda.
Are you attempting to quote me here, or is this your poor interpretation of my argument? Women can and do serve in combat, however I do not agree with lowering physical standards for infantry and other physically demanding roles. That's why I pointed out that there are plenty of other ways for women to serve.
Posted on 6/17/16 at 11:39 am to Bmath
quote:
Don't use a cliff hanger title. It's in the Guidelines for a reason.
This
OP could have easily have just said "How do you feel about women being drafted in combat?" in the title.
Posted on 6/17/16 at 11:52 am to Bmath
I've been deployed three times. Twice to Iraq and once to Afghanistan doing route clearance in some of the most deadly terrain in the world. I've worked with some excellent and professional women in the Army and was fortunate enough to serve with them. I would have no problem with women serving in a combat MOS regarding the draft.
Posted on 6/17/16 at 11:54 am to tiger81
I don't think anyone should be drafted.
if you are going to have a draft, no exemptions for the scions of wealth.
if you are going to have a draft, no exemptions for the scions of wealth.
Posted on 6/17/16 at 12:19 pm to Bmath
Let me breakdown your train wreck responses:
Is this true or relevant now that the Senate has voted to draft women, and the SOD has said to integrate women into combat roles right away? Not reading my message left you in the dark!
Using ad hominem attacks, that would be you.
TL;DR is the lamest thing on this board. If you don't have time to read a post, don't respond to it!!
quote:
Based on equal rights then yes the draft should be open to all people. That being said, they don't have to draft people into combat roles. There are plenty of non combat support roles that women and less able bodied people could fill.
Is this true or relevant now that the Senate has voted to draft women, and the SOD has said to integrate women into combat roles right away? Not reading my message left you in the dark!
quote:
stop being an arse
Using ad hominem attacks, that would be you.
TL;DR is the lamest thing on this board. If you don't have time to read a post, don't respond to it!!
Posted on 6/17/16 at 12:20 pm to lsunurse
You could have easily read the first two words of the message, too. You are both blaming others for your laziness.
Posted on 6/17/16 at 12:22 pm to tiger81
And you can't seem to follow basic guidelines when posting topics on this message board.
Posted on 6/17/16 at 12:23 pm to tiger81
quote:
Is this true or relevant now that the Senate has voted to draft women...
You asked for an opinion:
quote:
how do you feel about women being drafted
Posted on 6/17/16 at 12:24 pm to lsunurse
You're so full of it. Why do they have a message box?
They could just have titles. Stop being lazy and get a clue!
They could just have titles. Stop being lazy and get a clue!
Posted on 6/17/16 at 12:27 pm to tiger81
quote:
Important: Don't force readers to have to click the thread to know what it is about
quote:
2. The subject of the thread is cut off. This is a problem that has been popping up a lot lately. A user will post a subject such as:
"The key to winning the game is..."
or
"I am about to get torn to shreds but I think that"
For whatever reasons, the user cut the subject off and is requiring that the reader click on the thread to find out what the point of the thread is. We would rather the main idea of the thread to be inside the subject
Right from Chicken himself
LINK
This post was edited on 6/17/16 at 12:28 pm
Posted on 6/17/16 at 12:27 pm to SpqrTiger
quote:
time to put Heather on the front line, in accordance with the orders of the Commander-in-Chief. I, for one, am glad this systematic discrimination against females is coming to an end. It's time to give them the opportunity to enjoy the horrors of war firsthand.
Yeap, we need to start treating them like equals.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News