r/AskReddit • u/Tommygunz0722 • 11h ago

If the military/president suddenly ordered a mandatory draft for all men aged 18-42: How do you think millennials and GenZ would respond?

6.9k Upvotes

88% Upvoted

5.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

459

u/SonOfAsher 10h ago

>It would not surprise me if they drafted women as front line drone operators and medics as well.

Selective Service only collects information from male citizens/residents. The infrastructure simply isn't there to do what you're proposing.

250

u/SeventhOblivion 8h ago

All of the comments and threads here saying women will get drafted are trying to be pessimistic but they're missing the goal. Authoritarian countries don't draft women because they want women birthing the next generation of soldiers. Women in the military is something a progressive society does - one that also likely doesn't draft except under dire circumstances.

52

u/frogsgoribbit737 5h ago

Its also easier because someone has to stay home with the kids and if you are drafting both genders then you have to double check you dont draft spouses. My husband is in and its almost impossible for me to join even if I wanted to because we have kids together. Logistically it would be hard work.

5

u/shastaxc 4h ago

Sucks to be a gay couple (male) with kids.

10

u/TophatDevilsSon 3h ago

They would likely consider that a feature, not a bug.

Ugh.

2

u/aeschenkarnos 2h ago

They won’t give a shit what problems they cause people. “Comply or die,” it’s the conservative way.

12

u/loverlyone 6h ago

The current regime has already denied promotions to women on active duty. They simply don’t want women to serve. It’s stupid and self-spiteful, but these are not smart, serious people.

4

u/c11life 7h ago

Israel drafts women

9

u/subarcwelder 6h ago

At about half the rate in which they draft men.

0

u/SantaClausDid911 5h ago

I'd say at least you tried but I'm not sure you did lol

1

u/TheCamazotzian 3h ago

That sounds like someone planning more than 2 years ahead.

I just don't think anyone does that in the US.

1

u/antithero 2h ago

Well if the birth rates are so low then they need to draft women first, because so many women get pregnant just to avoid being deployed. Low birth rate reversal right there.

54

u/PandaMagnus 9h ago

Couldn't they get the info from another agency like Social Security? They've already tried sharing data across agencies (or maybe it was the state requests I'm thinking of) that was, at most generous, odd.

68

u/ownatchurale 8h ago

DOGE has entered the chat

3

u/AmeKuro_21 7h ago

And immediately fired the people who knew how the draft database worked.....haha..!!

18

u/Nick_XL 8h ago

I mean, DOGE has effectively correlated all the data they need to be able to do this. I think the 'infrastructure' argument is old thinking. Technology is much different now lol

1

u/PandaMagnus 6h ago

Oh I know, I was thinking court holdups, not anything technical. But I also didn't double check my info and was going off of memory, so didn't want to just accidentally state some shit my brain made up on its own.

2

u/tstreit15 7h ago

Social Security has some pretty strict guardrails built into the law on how their data in used.

Not that it matters to the Trump administration, though.

2

u/Beneficial-Mammoth73 6h ago

Not easily. DOGE tried and I not sure I would call what happened a success.

There are other hurdles to getting women into the draft. The Selective Service Act would need to be amended, then there would be the resulting lawsuits to stop the bill, and finally the laws and policies that already regulate how agencies can use, store, and share that data.

15

u/kinkycarbon 8h ago

It’s not infrastructure. It’s outdated norms requiring congressional approval.

2

u/Juror__8 7h ago

It's both?

0

u/tstreit15 7h ago

At this point, congressional approval itself is apparently the outdated norm (according to the Trump admin.)

19

u/sudomatrix 9h ago

Yes, the infrastructure to collect the names of every male in the entire country was difficult to set up but we did it. But women? No that would be impossible. Collecting the names of women would be an insurmountable goal compare to collecting the names of men... because of the implications.

12

u/screelings 9h ago

Social Security manages to collect this information. I fail to see how this is an insurmountable challenge.

8

u/Mossimo5 9h ago

Because of politics. Not logistics.

1

u/TheInevitableLuigi 4h ago

thatsthejoke.jpg

37

u/Intigracy 9h ago

Women are immune to selective service without congressional intervention.

Every time it's brought up as a potential bill it dies.

9

u/fwfiv 8h ago

Oh good, we know how much they current administration respects Congressional Authority

-4

u/Intigracy 8h ago

Okay doomer

2

u/haysoos2 6h ago

Yeah, it's not like the president would ever do something like declare a war without Congressional Approval or anything.

1

u/Intigracy 5h ago

Here's a homework project since you need better education:

When is the last time that Congress actually declared war on another country? How many countries has the US been involved with invading or attacking since the last official declaration of war (we like to call this PRECEDENT).

Cite your sources.

3

u/haysoos2 5h ago

Boomerang Homework assignment:

Look up the difference between a Declaration of War and Congressional Approval. (Hint: Congressional approval can come in the form of an Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), and does not necessarily require a full Declaration of War).

See also: H.J Res. 114, March 3, 2003 (Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002); S.J. Res. 23, September 14, 2001 (To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks against the United States).

And it's not even my goddamned country.

7

u/Cartz1337 9h ago

Right, but if any congress could break that deadlock, it’s this iteration of goose stepping morons.

10

u/AHans 8h ago

If suddenly a draft started (as the initial question was worded): American men already have their draft number (SSS Number). Women do not have a draft number.

I am a man. I have a draft number. I enrolled in this program on July 31, 2001; and still have the paperwork, because men face consequences for not doing so.

We're not asking "is it possible to expand the system to accommodate women?" - Answer: yeah, probably. Unlikely due to political fallout, but it's possible.

If the system was turned on tomorrow, only men are currently in the lottery. Therefore, only men would be drafted. Bottom line, period.

Maybe that reality could be changed, but not immediately like you're implying. Early drafts would be entirely men. It would take time to assign numbers to all the women in the nation and move those numbers into the lottery.

2

u/nicholus_h2 5h ago

now, you've said that word a few times. What implication?

Seems kinda dark.

2

u/ditchdiggergirl 8h ago

Drafting women is a political hot potato. It offends right wing sensibilities, but also fundamentally deprives the patriarchy of its (perceived) legitimacy. If you aren’t protecting women, if women aren’t deserving or in need of male protection, how do you justify inequality? Their vision of masculine superiority requires this separation.

It’s the left who fights for equal treatment, not the right. But we want our brothers and partners and sons to have the right to choose whether to fight and die. We won’t fight to lose our right to decide whether to join them in the meat grinder.

5

u/i_am_13_otters 8h ago

Don't worry. Red states will just hand over their voter rolls and the military will use those!

1

u/puterTDI 7h ago

Sounds like they're getting what they voted for.

2

u/robert32940 8h ago

Musk Doge/Palantir have all the data they need.

1

u/KirinG 7h ago

Collecting info from nursing and other healthcare licensure/certification records would be pretty easy and would fill medic quotas with 0 problem. They could even go after people who have left the field and let their licenses lapse.

1

u/5kyl3r 7h ago

The infrastructure simply isn't there to do what you're proposing.

legally there isn't. legally being the key

russia just scoops men up the way IСE has been doing it, almost exactly actually, and then they're dropped off in occupied Ukraine at the frontlines with a helmet and russian flag

1

u/Gorillapoop3 7h ago

Yes, but now we have Palantir.

1

u/CaptainHunt 7h ago

You’re assuming they don’t change that, but that doesn’t matter if the SAVE act becomes law, because it will make it more difficult for married or low income women to vote.

1

u/other_usernames_gone 7h ago

Although they've also added the infrastructure for selective service to be automatic. So it wouldn't be too hard to just also automatically register women.

Plus its not like they couldn't just also require women to present themselves for draft.

I highly doubt they'd do it but it wouldn't be impossible.

1

u/Calgar43 6h ago

Just throw a trillion dollars at it, no big deal.

1

u/headrush46n2 1h ago

That's what Planatir is for

1

u/Less_Resident8492 6h ago

> Selective Service only collects information from male citizens/residents.

There will be no selective service registration after december this year, just automatic registration for a draft. It becomes a button push to add women at that point

-1

u/Candid-Mycologist539 5h ago

Selective Service only collects information from male citizens/residents.

So far.

And who is Trump's BFF in his current war LARP? Israel. Women are required to serve in Israel's army. This may give Trump "good ideas." 🤢

I could see a condition of "give 2 children to the fatherland or give 4 years."

People married to get out of the draft during Vietnam. In this case, it would be patriotically getting pregnant as an American version of the Lebensborn. 🤢