Military personnel and veterans challenged President Obama, often aggressively, on his refusal to use the phrase “Islamic terrorism,” his decision to open combat jobs up to women and the performance of the Department of Veterans Affairs at a town hall meeting here Wednesday.
Obama was at this Army base near Richmond to take part in a military-focused special that aired Wednesday night on CNN. The cable network selected questioners who were respectful but who reflected a military population that is more conservative than the population as a whole and generally skeptical of the president’s performance as commander in chief over the past eight years.[...]
A mother whose 19-year-old son was killed in Baghdad in 2007 pressed Obama more directly on the subject, asking him, “Why do you still refuse to use the term ‘Islamic terrorism’?” Obama countered that he did not want to conflate murderous terrorists with “the billion Muslims . . . who are peaceful, who are responsible, who in this country are our fellow troops.”
An active-duty Marine officer challenged the president’s decision to open combat jobs to women, saying that studies conducted by the Marine Corps showed that such units performed “notably worse” and that women “suffered staggeringly higher rates of injury.”
“Why were these tangible, negative consequences disregarded?” she asked.
Obama said that he had not acted out of political correctness and noted that women have been fighting at great risk in Iraq and Afghanistan for more than a decade. “I want to make sure our starting assumption is that if you can do the job, you should be able to get the job,” he said.[...]
Among the toughest questions he fielded was one from a woman who said her husband had waited a year for an appointment from VA. When he finally saw a doctor, his cancer was misdiagnosed and not treated.
“First of all, my heart goes out to you,” Obama said. He then said that he had increased the VA budget by 85 percent over the course of his presidency but that there was more work to do
Here is a letter that can be adapted by people in the U.S. to send to their Senators:
ReplyDeleteDear Senator ---,
I am writing to you on the issue of Sen. McCain's legislation to "Draft America's Daughters".
There is no military draft in the U.S. at this time. However, men are required to register for the draft. It is conceivable that there will be a draft at some point in the future. If the draft is reinstated, then some of the men who are registered for the draft will be called up for military service.
Women are not required to register for the draft at this time.
The U.S. Congress has the power to make legislation to require women to register for the draft. Right now, language has been added to legislation that is in committee that would require women to register.
I oppose the legislation on the basis of what I call the "3 R's": Religion, Rape, and Readiness. The following will explain the 3 R's.
Religion
Military service for women is inconsistent with the religious observance of many women. This conflict between religion and the draft is separate from the "conscientious objector" status that men may seek if they are drafted.
Many religious women would likely object to being drafted on the basis of other religious directives.
Thus, drafting women would lead to having to institute a whole bureaucracy to deal with the cases of women who legitimately claim religious exemptions. Furthermore, there will be women who do not have a basis for a legitimate religious exemption but who may claim they do in order to avoid the draft.
Rape
Rape of enlisted women by other soldiers in the military is well documented. The rate of rape seems to be significantly higher than in society at large.
This issue will become more pronounced during the next few years. It seems to me that what may be needed is a registry of military rapists, similar to the registry of convicted pedophiles that already exists.
The culture of rape is apparently so prevalent in the U.S. military that I would even go so far as arguing that some who advocate for a draft of women have an unstated agenda of providing male soldiers with what has in the past been euphemistically called "comfort women".
Readiness
The two issues mentioned so far, religion and rape, will affect the readiness of the military in a time leading up to war and during wartime itself. These issues will distract from the war effort and lead to division in the country at precisely a time when unity will be required.
Furthermore, it seems to me that the country would be conducting a huge military social experiment with the draft of women. A peacetime draft would be the time to experiment. America is unlikely to institute a peacetime draft, however. Thus a wartime draft of women would add one more risk factor into the already risky nature of war.
Admittedly, there may be no good reason, based on current judicial understandings of the U. S. Constitution, to prevent a draft of women. But as has been said before in other contexts, the Constitution is not a suicide pact.
Traditionally, in the U.S., national security concerns have been allowed to overshadow strict interpretations of rights. Thus, not drafting women is just something that men and women are going to have to deal with: it is inherently unfair for the draft to target men, but that is the way it is.
The tangled and involved issue of gender should not be allowed to threaten those in the country who have not swallowed the Kool-Aid of political correctness.
I urge you to contact Sen. McCain and express opposition to his efforts to draft women.
Sincerely,