US Presidential election 2024 thread. - Page 42 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#15318737
QatzelOk wrote:It's really hard to decide which mentally-damaged mafia creation to vote for, isn't it.

What's really exciting about this election is that there will probably be an Economic Depression-slash-nuclear war right after the new prez's first AIPAC brunch date.


Wow.
#15318846
Well the Democrats not only lost the presidential election today, they lost the Senate and any chance for the House of Representatives. How?

Well they had just about every woman in the country seeing this election as about reproductive rights. So what do they do to these leaning conservative women who they have a chance to recruit? They put a rider in the Defense Authorization Act to require women to register for the draft. The Republicans are already fund raising on this. The Republican candidate for the Senate in Nevada, who was severely scarred in the war is already running "look at my face" ads. Two Senators other democratic senators in tight races are just well and truly fucked.

I could not find any recent polls about this but a polls in 2017 and 2021 show support for the idea falling. In 2021 only 38% of women supported the idea. Further. As far as I can see there is not alternative service in the bill nor exemption for the mothers babies. Hopefully the bill will also include a rider that requires men to learn how to nurse children.

I have seen some abject stupidity before but this is a perfect example of why Democrats cannot be trusted to govern in any way even remotely resembling the will of the people. Never rule out the possibility that despite holding all of the cards, Democrats can figure out how to lose an election.

If this rider remains on the DAA I will be voting for the republicans in the upcoming election. This would mean that I would have to vote for Kerry Lake. But even she has the sense not to put forward such a foolish notion in an election year.
#15318848
Drlee wrote:Well the Democrats not only lost the presidential election today, they lost the Senate and any chance for the House of Representatives. How?

Well they had just about every woman in the country seeing this election as about reproductive rights. So what do they do to these leaning conservative women who they have a chance to recruit? They put a rider in the Defense Authorization Act to require women to register for the draft. The Republicans are already fund raising on this. The Republican candidate for the Senate in Nevada, who was severely scarred in the war is already running "look at my face" ads. Two Senators other democratic senators in tight races are just well and truly fucked.

I could not find any recent polls about this but a polls in 2017 and 2021 show support for the idea falling. In 2021 only 38% of women supported the idea. Further. As far as I can see there is not alternative service in the bill nor exemption for the mothers babies. Hopefully the bill will also include a rider that requires men to learn how to nurse children.

I have seen some abject stupidity before but this is a perfect example of why Democrats cannot be trusted to govern in any way even remotely resembling the will of the people. Never rule out the possibility that despite holding all of the cards, Democrats can figure out how to lose an election.

If this rider remains on the DAA I will be voting for the republicans in the upcoming election. This would mean that I would have to vote for Kerry Lake. But even she has the sense not to put forward such a foolish notion in an election year.


Democrats like to shoot themselves in the foot at times although one might argue that Democrats stupidity is nowhere close to Trumps stupidity as an alternative. Still not good.

In the grander scheme of things, who even cares about the draft in a sense that it shouldn't be an election issue in the first place and should be something that the military should decide and its not like they need women for the draft in the first place. Even Ukraine doesn't need to recruit females in to the military outside of nurse rolls. But nurse rolls have always been the norm for the military since ages past. So why does US need it? There is literally no need for this change. And I do not see anybody fielding an army of 30-40 million soldiers. How do you even arm them all with modern weapons?
#15318897
Drlee wrote:Well the Democrats not only lost the presidential election today, they lost the Senate and any chance for the House of Representatives. How?

Well they had just about every woman in the country seeing this election as about reproductive rights. So what do they do to these leaning conservative women who they have a chance to recruit? They put a rider in the Defense Authorization Act to require women to register for the draft. The Republicans are already fund raising on this. The Republican candidate for the Senate in Nevada, who was severely scarred in the war is already running "look at my face" ads. Two Senators other democratic senators in tight races are just well and truly fucked.

I could not find any recent polls about this but a polls in 2017 and 2021 show support for the idea falling. In 2021 only 38% of women supported the idea. Further. As far as I can see there is not alternative service in the bill nor exemption for the mothers babies. Hopefully the bill will also include a rider that requires men to learn how to nurse children.

I have seen some abject stupidity before but this is a perfect example of why Democrats cannot be trusted to govern in any way even remotely resembling the will of the people. Never rule out the possibility that despite holding all of the cards, Democrats can figure out how to lose an election.

If this rider remains on the DAA I will be voting for the republicans in the upcoming election. This would mean that I would have to vote for Kerry Lake. But even she has the sense not to put forward such a foolish notion in an election year.


I have not been keeping up with the latest dumb moves on the part of the Democratic party. I ignore their emails that they send to some woman named Concepción whom they think can be told how to vote. Lol.

Anyhow, this news about some selective service draft to the military of women is sheer craziness. I would never in a million years endorse such a stupid move.

War is horrible as it is with all the problems war brings. But, to sacrifice a bunch of young, healthy women in the altar of the God of War so some asshole dictator people can keep fighting it out for profits and supremacy is the peak of suicidal thought.

The Spaniards during the taking over of the Americas never allowed women to be sent off to the New World. It was high risk. The logic back then in the Spanish Golden Age of Colonialism and so on? Was that if you sacrifice your women you sacrifice the future of the entire country. They are right about that. You lose your fertile women in their reproductive age? You might as well surrender to the enemy. Because there will be no future for that society. Women giving birth to children is a life or death, survival of the species event. The ones who do not understand that are extremely stupid Drlee.

I would suggest a strong third party at this point is the only solution to the stupidity of both conventional majority parties. There is no other alternative at this point. Neither can do what needs to happen at this point. Logic is not happening there.

What blatant dumbness.
#15318915
Rugoz wrote:The draft hasn't been enforced since 1973. It's a total non-issue.


It is sort of a touchy topic. I wouldn't say it is a fully non-issue just a non-issue if you don't bring changes to it during an election you know. In the first place, the military needs to advise on this and I literally see no reason why a draft needs women in a country that has 320 million people.

US won't have enough weapons to even arm 10% of the draftees fully that are only men. And by 10% that should already be in 3 to 4 million range. So why make your draft force of 30-40 million in to 60-80 million. That is just redicilous. There is not enough weapons in the world to fully arm them. All military forces of the whole world combined right now won't total to 30-40 million.
#15318923
Rugoz wrote:The draft hasn't been enforced since 1973. It's a total non-issue.


Then why suggest selective service for young women in the USA? It is very troubling. I would think they are gearing up for WWIII if they are wanting a bill to be passed into law drafting women who are between the ages of 18-40 or so. Those are the base of future generations right there. You go and send them to be shot in some foreign combat mission? For what?

And men who have to kill women soldiers or they are captured and raped too? That entire scene stinks.

Imagine having to remove women from their posts because they might be in high risk danger situations? Men killing off women is a bad problem. The soldiers in this wars in Africa who go into a nation and rape women and torture them and then kill them or they draft them to become child soldiers? What kind of horror is that?

Women can be part of the military if they VOLUNTEER for it. But if my daughter tells me 'Mom, I hate all that military stuff. I got a letter telling me I got to fill out a draft card or they won't let me study for my degree in college. What do I do? Or I am supposed to report to basic training because the war in Europe has gotten worse and now women have to defend the country. '

Hell no. I would send her out of the USA and risk her going to jail before I would allow my daughter to become cannon fodder. My sons who do not want to go I would tell them not to enlist and or to say no and RUN out of the situation by any means. Conscientious objector or something. But my daughter? Hell no, I would not consent to that at all! Involuntary draft for women is stupid in the extreme.
#15318972
Drlee wrote:...this election as about reproductive rights. ...


Yes, it's yet another abortion election.

But what most of the electorate doesn't realize is that their own elites are seeking the "right to abort" the entire working class of the USA, and they intend to do this by provoking wars of destruction with other superpowers.

It's really about the 1%'s right to chose (whether or not to genocide the deplorables).

Tainari88 wrote:...War is horrible as it is with all the problems war brings. But, to sacrifice a bunch of young, healthy women in the altar of the God of War so some asshole dictator people can keep fighting it out for profits and supremacy is the peak of suicidal thought. ...

I think that the next war should be fought by women only. Let the men work in the factories producing armaments, but let it be the women who get bombed in foxholes this time.

Equality means equality - it isn't a banquet where you take what you want (ie. equal pay but no getting killed en masse in wars).
#15319318
Tainari88 wrote:Then why suggest selective service for young women in the USA? It is very troubling. I would think they are gearing up for WWIII if they are wanting a bill to be passed into law drafting women who are between the ages of 18-40 or so. Those are the base of future generations right there. You go and send them to be shot in some foreign combat mission? For what?

And men who have to kill women soldiers or they are captured and raped too? That entire scene stinks.

Imagine having to remove women from their posts because they might be in high risk danger situations? Men killing off women is a bad problem. The soldiers in this wars in Africa who go into a nation and rape women and torture them and then kill them or they draft them to become child soldiers? What kind of horror is that?

Women can be part of the military if they VOLUNTEER for it. But if my daughter tells me 'Mom, I hate all that military stuff. I got a letter telling me I got to fill out a draft card or they won't let me study for my degree in college. What do I do? Or I am supposed to report to basic training because the war in Europe has gotten worse and now women have to defend the country. '

Hell no. I would send her out of the USA and risk her going to jail before I would allow my daughter to become cannon fodder. My sons who do not want to go I would tell them not to enlist and or to say no and RUN out of the situation by any means. Conscientious objector or something. But my daughter? Hell no, I would not consent to that at all! Involuntary draft for women is stupid in the extreme.


How is woman being raped worse than a man being tortured and killed? How is killing a woman worse than killing a man?

Also, keeping women out of wars because of their role as breeding machines, really?

Women should serve as men do, at least in roles that aren't particularly demanding physically.
#15319320
Well Biden fucked up the first debate by the looks of it. Does it change things? MMM I am not sure as of now. Probably did but may be didn't. Needs more time for analysis. Its not like that Trump did better but still I thought Biden at least could stand there and be presentable. Otherwise both sides just walked in to their own pitfalls.
#15319327
Tainari88 wrote:Then why suggest selective service for young women in the USA? It is very troubling. I would think they are gearing up for WWIII if they are wanting a bill to be passed into law drafting women who are between the ages of 18-40 or so. Those are the base of future generations right there. You go and send them to be shot in some foreign combat mission? For what?

And men who have to kill women soldiers or they are captured and raped too? That entire scene stinks.

Imagine having to remove women from their posts because they might be in high risk danger situations? Men killing off women is a bad problem. The soldiers in this wars in Africa who go into a nation and rape women and torture them and then kill them or they draft them to become child soldiers? What kind of horror is that?

Women can be part of the military if they VOLUNTEER for it. But if my daughter tells me 'Mom, I hate all that military stuff. I got a letter telling me I got to fill out a draft card or they won't let me study for my degree in college. What do I do? Or I am supposed to report to basic training because the war in Europe has gotten worse and now women have to defend the country. '

Hell no. I would send her out of the USA and risk her going to jail before I would allow my daughter to become cannon fodder. My sons who do not want to go I would tell them not to enlist and or to say no and RUN out of the situation by any means. Conscientious objector or something. But my daughter? Hell no, I would not consent to that at all! Involuntary draft for women is stupid in the extreme.


*Equality (with an asterisk).
#15319329
Rugoz wrote:Independents? Seriously?

It's about the looks, not politics.

Newson, or any of the other favourites.


How do you win the election without the independents?

Thinking about it, someone like Buttigieg would be a good candidate. Maybe as a VP pick.
#15319332
Tainari88 wrote:I have not been keeping up with the latest dumb moves on the part of the Democratic party. I ignore their emails that they send to some woman named Concepción whom they think can be told how to vote. Lol.

Anyhow, this news about some selective service draft to the military of women is sheer craziness. I would never in a million years endorse such a stupid move.

War is horrible as it is with all the problems war brings. But, to sacrifice a bunch of young, healthy women in the altar of the God of War so some asshole dictator people can keep fighting it out for profits and supremacy is the peak of suicidal thought.

The Spaniards during the taking over of the Americas never allowed women to be sent off to the New World. It was high risk. The logic back then in the Spanish Golden Age of Colonialism and so on? Was that if you sacrifice your women you sacrifice the future of the entire country. They are right about that. You lose your fertile women in their reproductive age? You might as well surrender to the enemy. Because there will be no future for that society. Women giving birth to children is a life or death, survival of the species event. The ones who do not understand that are extremely stupid Drlee.

I would suggest a strong third party at this point is the only solution to the stupidity of both conventional majority parties. There is no other alternative at this point. Neither can do what needs to happen at this point. Logic is not happening there.

What blatant dumbness.



First of all , in spite of what those such as @Drlee have alleged , this proposed measure is not as severe as it might be made out to be .

A June 16 Facebook post claims a new demographic is now legally required to register for the Selective Service.

"The US Military under Biden has such an incredible shortfall of recruitment, thanks to their idiotic DEI and anti-white policies, that they’re now requiring women to register for selective service – the draft," reads the post's caption.

The post includes an image of a bullet-pointed list titled "Strengthening the Joint Force and Defense Workforce" and circles in red a bullet-point that says, "Amends the Military Selective Service Act to require the registration of women for Selective Service."

A similar version of the claim shared on Instagram garnered more than 100 likes in two days. Other versions of the claim were shared on Facebook and X, formerly Twitter. Though a Senate committee approved a bill that would require women to register for the Selective Service, the bill is still far from becoming law. It must still be approved by both chambers of Congress and signed by the president. The Senate Committee on Armed Services voted to advance the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025, which authorizes funding levels for the U.S. military and other defense-related areas for the upcoming fiscal year, on June 14. As the Facebook post highlights, one element of the bill also calls for women to register for the Selective Service.

The bill still has a long way to go before becoming law, however.

The committee said in a June 14 press release that now that the bill has been approved, it will advance to the Senate for consideration. The bill will then need to be approved by both the Senate and the House and be presented to the president for signing.

Fact check: No, Selective Service registration bill doesn't reinstitute draft

This isn't the first time the Senate committee has suggested such a change. The group previously proposed several bills in recent years recommending the inclusion of women in the Selective Service, but each time the bill failed to progress through Congress.

Though the Selective Service System would provide personnel to the Department of Defense in the case of a draft, the U.S. hasn't held one in more than 50 years. The most recent draft was held in 1973 during the Vietnam War. USA Today


And also , even if a draft were to be reinstated , and women were to be included , it wouldn't necessarily mean that they'd be placed into combatant roles .


The Senate Armed Services Committee’s Democratic chair Jack Reed has defended the policy change proposal, saying that women can serve without being on troops on the front lines.

‘Women are doing a remarkable job in our forces today, and if we were in a situation requiring a draft, I think we would need all able-bodied citizens 18 and above,’ said Reed.

He added that the hypothetical scenario of going into a draft would mean a ‘serious, serious situation’.

‘It’s not like World War II where we need a lot of infantry,’ Reed said. ‘We need cyber experts, we need intelligence analysts, linguists, etc. Wait a second, there are a lot of women out there that can do this better than men.’.... As of early this year, around 20 countries have laws allowing women to be conscripted into military service.

It is a far smaller number compared to the dozens of nations that have laws for drafting men.

The countries with mandatory military service for women are: Benin, Chad, Congo, Equitorial Guinea, Eritrea, Guinea-Bissau, Israel, Mali, Morocco, Mozambique, Niger, North Korean, Norway, Senegal, South Sudan, Sudan, Sweden, Tunisia, Venezuela and Vietnam. MSN



This is not the first time that right-wing Republicans have made such an appeal to absurdity either . Phyllis Schlafly , for example made such an argument , as it pertained to the Equal Rights Amendment .

https://www.history.com/news/equal-rights-amendment-failure-phyllis-schlafly


https://billofrightsinstitute.org/essays/phyllis-schlafly-and-the-debate-over-the-equal-rights-amendment


Historically , incidentally , the first country that I know of to utilize women in a combatant role was the U.S.S.R. , during World War II . However , I feel that this was largely due to the male population having been decimated by first World War I , and then subsequently the Russian Civil War . And so , in accordance with both Marxist feminism , and Articles 35 and 63 of the Soviet Constitution , women were eventually included in the war effort , including to some extent in combat .


https://military-history.fandom.com/wiki/Conscription_in_the_Soviet_Union#Conscription_of_Women

https://www.historynet.com/soviet-women-war/






  • 1
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43
  • 44
  • 52

Trump probably wins this. Anti-Trumpers will just […]

The most telling thing is the phrase 'devout' Repu[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

The crash is coming :lol: Moscow didn't learn wh[…]

World War II Day by Day

July 16, Tuesday Hitler issues battle orders for[…]