General Discussion

Moonwalk

(2,322 posts)

110. Because infants and toddlers are distracting and will force the soldiers to split their attention...

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 08:26 PM

Jan 2013

...from fighting. Duh.

I mean, if you're going to try and pretend that drafting women will lead to such an absurdity--which I'm sure you don't for a second believe--then let's be "realistic" as you keep saying people are not being. Realistically, you can't have babies distracting your soldiers from fighting.

So. Duh. It ain't going to go that way. Seems to me that you are getting less and less realistic. Are you ready to take yourself to task for that the way you've been taking everyone else to task for it?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

116 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

What do these women think about women serving in combat? [View all] obamanut2012 Jan 2013 OP

This message was self-deleted by its author Fresh_Start Jan 2013 #1

+1 Starry Messenger Jan 2013 #2

They've never seen me out trailrunning with male friends obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #3

And I guess someone forgot to tell these women that they can't lift stuff good. Starry Messenger Jan 2013 #14

Already saw someone (banned troll) Rex Jan 2013 #17

I have a close family member who is a Wounded Warrior obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #18

I've been against DADT since I learned about it. Rex Jan 2013 #24

Maybe they should adjust it so men should have the stamina to stay in labor for 16 hours Starry Messenger Jan 2013 #25

They've also never met my mother obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #28

Or my grandmother or her sister... Sekhmets Daughter Jan 2013 #102

Same here. But then again the strongest people in my Rex Jan 2013 #29

Thank you for all your posts. Starry Messenger Jan 2013 #34

+1 obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #38

Nice! Rex Jan 2013 #74

lift things like mopinko Jan 2013 #78

I have a friend who is 5'6", 145 lbs and can dead lift 275 pounds DollarBillHines Jan 2013 #87

It's appalling that women are serving and have served in combat zones but aren't considered capable Gormy Cuss Jan 2013 #4

+1 obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #10

Love that pic of REP(!) Duckworth!! Wait Wut Jan 2013 #5

I do, too! obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #11

Tammy was interviewed yesterday. She is all for it. When asked how she lost her legs, whathehell Jan 2013 #6

What spirit...U go! nt sheshe2 Jan 2013 #58

She's great. I met her briefly and did some phone banking for her in the primaries. whathehell Jan 2013 #76

Thank you so much, for the work you did for her. sheshe2 Jan 2013 #79

Oh, you're quite welcome!...I've always been a fan and whathehell Jan 2013 #86

K&R Jamastiene Jan 2013 #7

We all learned that there is something much bigger than us Rex Jan 2013 #8

My word exactly: disrespectful obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #12

unbelievably disrespectful Rex Jan 2013 #15

You're welcome obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #20

I saw that! Rex Jan 2013 #26

Sgt Jennifer Hartman Skittles Jan 2013 #9

Thank you -- I hope others post names and phitos obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #13

I'm linking her photo obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #21

Add the lovely Carrie French Skittles Jan 2013 #23

Thanks Skittles. We shouldn't forget. JustABozoOnThisBus Jan 2013 #80

Damn... some dust in my eye... obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #81

Brave women who deserve the full honors, rank and pay for their service REP Jan 2013 #16

From Zack Beauchamp's response to Ryan Smith's WSJ opinion piece... pinboy3niner Jan 2013 #19

Yay -- thanks for this! obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #22

"Wall Street Journal: Women Shouldn�t Be In Combat Because Men Poop" Starry Messenger Jan 2013 #27

Methinks Ryan Smith isn't married obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #30

Who does he think changed his diapers? Starry Messenger Jan 2013 #31

omg obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #39

Perhaps he lives 2naSalit Jan 2013 #60

This woman is pro-choice.... including if she wants to be in combat. firehorse Jan 2013 #32

This entire argument sulphurdunn Jan 2013 #33

Fine obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #41

Absolutely, sulphurdunn Jan 2013 #48

So, you are saying procreation is more important than equal rights obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #54

The Lebensborn sulphurdunn Jan 2013 #56

*whistle* obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #57

Is reality sulphurdunn Jan 2013 #73

I'm sorry, but if you're talking reality, then let's talk SEVEN BILLION PEOPLE... Moonwalk Jan 2013 #99

Overpopulation sulphurdunn Jan 2013 #108

That is simply not true, have you never heard of immigration? RB TexLa Jan 2013 #71

So, one side sulphurdunn Jan 2013 #72

What kind of stupid answer is that? Do you think we're going to have a war with only two sides? Moonwalk Jan 2013 #100

Refering to other people's sulphurdunn Jan 2013 #106

The scenario you describe is not what I was saying. RB TexLa Jan 2013 #111

I understand. sulphurdunn Jan 2013 #113

We all have to share the burden wryter2000 Jan 2013 #42

They shouldn't be, sulphurdunn Jan 2013 #51

Why only men? AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #91

Men are biologically sulphurdunn Jan 2013 #92

Expendable? AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #93

We've been lucky that way. sulphurdunn Jan 2013 #97

None of those wars threatened the survival of the populations mentioned. AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #98

If we're involved in another Civil War (which was fought by a lot of immigrants on the North side)-- Moonwalk Jan 2013 #101

Slavery is wrong, whether for women or for men. ehrenfeucht games Jan 2013 #52

There's a HUGE difference between free choice and slavery. ehrenfeucht games Jan 2013 #47

..... obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #50

I served with sulphurdunn Jan 2013 #53

Oh brother zappaman Jan 2013 #61

it's not really fair for young poor men La Lioness Priyanka Jan 2013 #82

Same. No material difference. AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #90

It sounds to me like women will have an unfair advantage in evading the draft... Moonwalk Jan 2013 #103

Why not draft them anyway. sulphurdunn Jan 2013 #107

Because infants and toddlers are distracting and will force the soldiers to split their attention... Moonwalk Jan 2013 #110

This Nation's success cbrer Jan 2013 #35

Women have served proudly Flora Jan 2013 #36

I agree obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #43

Post removed Post removed Jan 2013 #49

lololololol obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #55

What's so funny? You agreed with this: ehrenfeucht games Jan 2013 #59

LOL obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #62

Not to mention... zappaman Jan 2013 #63

I missed that! obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #64

Don't worry! zappaman Jan 2013 #65

hahaha obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #67

Perhaps, but I don't see it happening. Incitatus Jan 2013 #109

K & R Scurrilous Jan 2013 #37

Brigadier General Rhonda Cornum. (Ret.) AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #40

And the point is...? sulphurdunn Jan 2013 #88

Just addding one to the OP's list. AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #89

Nothing suggests sulphurdunn Jan 2013 #94

Thanks for posting! obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #95

HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!! WillyT Jan 2013 #44

I don't approve of anyone serving in combat! Pyrzqxgl Jan 2013 #45

National Defense is not a "Man's world".... Spitfire of ATJ Jan 2013 #46

Somewhere my mom is smiling mountain grammy Jan 2013 #66

That is such a cool story! obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #68

Excellent OP! Spazito Jan 2013 #69

Thank you! obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #70

K&R SunSeeker Jan 2013 #75

Have you seen OldEurope Jan 2013 #77

One of the many, many things we learned from Vietnam liberal_at_heart Jan 2013 #83

Thank you sarge43 Jan 2013 #84

Thank you -- I almost mentioned her in my OP obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #85

So what, since at least the Middle ages, one woman served with every 20 men in all Western Armies happyslug Jan 2013 #96

Sampson served in disguise, as an 11Bravo. That's the so what. sarge43 Jan 2013 #112

It's not that they can't serve on combat front lines Puzzledtraveller Jan 2013 #104

She would have supported it . orpupilofnature57 Jan 2013 #105

K & R! You wouldn't believe my nephews disagreement with this! mentalsolstice Jan 2013 #114

I believe it. I've heard sillier. sarge43 Jan 2013 #115

Great photo--that's at the WW2 Memorial. MADem Feb 2013 #116