the voluntary action of inhabiting switzerland involves
compensation to the country;;; I would expect that
there would be compensation to Midas Mulligan for
gulch habitation -- who pays for the shield? -- j
.

How is that not involuntary servitude?

That sergeant was acting out one at your expense.
Don't know if anyone was watching that gate she wanted to impress, but she at least wanted to be able to say start6ed out with that M60 and finished with it.
Doubt anyone would even imagine there's that middle part where you came in
As part of my "just in case you have to fight as a Marine supply clerk" advanced training, I fired a M60 one whole time during 1970.
I felt a rush, and I found it easy not to miss a stationary target with tracers.
Come to think of it, I do believe that was the only weapon I fired that had tracers.

How so?

Old dino's word for today charade,

Here is a little thing that happened to me that forever cemented my position on women in the military.

In my unit it was a tradition that when a person got promoted to E-5 Sgt. on the very next PT formation they had to carry the M-60 (a 23 pound machine gun for you civilians) for the run. I happened to be in line directly behind a newly minted female Sgt. as we started the run. It was a short run only about 8 miles. As we left the gate (we had run about 200 yards) she turned and handed me the M-60 and ordered me to carry it. As I was only an E-4 Spc. I did as I was told. At the end of the run as we pulled back into the post. She turned and demanded that I hand the M-60 over to her. I stated that I was good and would finish the run with it. She immediately began chewing me up one side and down the other. The 1st Sgt saw and overheard the whole thing. Thinking that I would receive some support. I stood my ground. Next thing I knew I had extra duty for the next 2 weeks and an official reprimand in my file. Apparently I was insubordinate to an NCO because of her sex.

Conscription is not a new invention but it is one that is direct conflict with the idea of a freeman. If in order to have the right to have a bank account I have to surrender my life at any demand by the state or even coerce me into killing people it deems unfit for life then I am not free. The Viet Nam war was not ended because of the outcry of those against it, the out cry went on for 10 years the actual involvement with 'advisors' was started under Eisenhower, it ended because those who profited from it were tired of it and feared enough people had become tired of it to find something else to do was easier and cheaper. Should women be drafted? If they want the right to vote to send me to the war (I am a man) then they get to go to, let's keep it equal. That's how I felt during the Viet Nam War, many women I knew felt they had the right to send me but thought they should not be involved because of their gender.

I can't argue with first hand experience. Obviously the women and even the men were getting a heavy dose of PC. However, my comments still stand. The women should endure the same conditions as the men. The sargent in charge should have been instructed to send women who couldn't cut it to other tasks. If that wasn't being done, then it wasn't the women's fault, but more likely a chain of command coming down from some administrator who couldn't find his ass with both hands.

As you say,brother.

I am sorry but speaking from personal experience, I am against women in combat. In the late 80's when I was in, we had several women in our unit. It was a normal occurance for them to be unable to preform simple tasks that the men would then have to pickup the slack on.
Additionally they then would be rotated back for showers every other day, whereas the men would be in the field indefinitely with no shower rotation.

Conscription is involuntary servitude. Men, women, it doesn't matter. Period. The End.

The real question is, "Should women be allowed to volunteer?" The answer is yes. Should they be allowed in combat? The answer is also yes. Then the next part of the debate becomes questioning as to whether women have the strength or stamina for combat. That can be determined during training as to what assignment they get. There are men who are not fit for combat who can serve In other capacities as well as women.

I spent a couple of months writing training manuals
for firefighters and electricians while waiting for my
place to open up in aircraft maintenance officers'
school in illinois. . as an engineer, they couldn't
believe that I could do it! -- j
.

and I happen to agree with the swiss who have
universal conscription -- or deportation ... or they
once did. . the military isn't the only option;;; you
can help with the courts or the libraries or some
other public service. . or pay a lifetime tax. -- j
.

I put the word "right" in quotes for that reason. The gender and/or race agenda people use the word "right" whenever they want their way in a social/legal situation. Because that word carries more "weight" than any other word they could use.

Honestly, I am not sure what word would actually be appropriate, but that one is not.

Sorry but "right" and "conscription" do not belong in the same sentence. If a law is involved, then "right", which is a freedom of action in a social situation, is not possible. The most you could have is some kind of privilege left to join up despite a force to be drafted. A law is a threat of the use of force to make some group to act or not do act. There are no rights involved in laws, just ending in the use of guns if resisted.

Conscription should be an act of national emergency to defend against an existential threat. The misuse of this mechanism for political purposes, e.g. gender equality, is misplaced.

In truth, real threats to the continued existence of the republic will likely draw enough volunteers to make conscription unnecessary. The concept arises from the misguided idea that anyone not in uniform is somehow a "free rider" on the sacrifice of their military brethren. In earlier times, I had a relative who was listed in the War of 1812 ranks simply for being a farmer who supplied the uniform military. We seem to have lost that sense of community and shared burden.

There could be ways to inspire increased volunteerism as an alternative to conscription, such as the right to vote based on evidence of service (as in Starship Troopers). This would require constitutional change.

If we had those kinds of laws we would have far fewer foreign interventions. As it is, changes in our law have made it far too easy for the executive branch to get us into things without congressional approval.

They intent of those changes was to allow quick reaction in case of attack, not give the President free reign to start wars without Congress' approval and declaration.

I mostly agree. I would leave it up to unit commanders whether to allow women in combat units -- but I would absolutely not have reduced, and would restore, the physical strength requirements of any branch or organization, but especially of elite forces like the SEALs and Green Berets. Let women's participation be limited to the few who are strong enough to pass the tests that were designed for men -- because these are jobs where strength really does matter.

The same goes for police and fire fighting jobs, unless that person is just going to sit behind a desk.

At least in Detroit the ethnic group baby production is a way of life. Generations have done this to "get their check." A friend of mine taught school in Detroit for many years and observed the culture first hand. A direct consequence of LBJ's "War on Poverty."

Those who would follow that strategy are already doing it. This is why 30% of all births in the US are now out-of-wedlock. (If Planned Parenthood were ever put out of business that number would grow very quickly.)

There is also a large correlation between this practice and membership in a certain ethnic group. Whether that is a coincidence is an interesting question.