

hide menu
#21 - unncommon has deleted their comment [-]
#120 to #21 - disconinja (10/17/2013) [-]
Did any of you guys noticed that the solider carrying the other solider has a boner??
User avatar #81 to #21 - habakkuk (10/17/2013) [-]
the USMC just recently started a limited experimental infantry training cycle with all women. First time in US history. I hear it's going pretty damn badly lol
User avatar #28 to #21 - bigmanfifty (10/17/2013) [-]
Pretty bad example, most men aren't soldiers
User avatar #200 to #28 - thesupervillian (10/18/2013) [-]
on a side note, an entire generation of russian males was wiped out in ww2 due to the high mortality rate of battle or somethin like that
User avatar #198 to #28 - justbeingagoof (10/18/2013) [-]
I am. Isn't as bad as it looks.
#143 to #28 - luigiyoshi **User deleted account** (10/18/2013) [-]
On another note, in the event of the draft... most men aren't soldiers.
#53 to #28 - endospore (10/17/2013) [-]
Two words: Selective service.

Women don't have to sign up for the draft, at least in America, and I'm willing to bet they don't in most countries. Also, women (by policy, not law) don't fight on the front lines if they do join the armed forces. (This is why they're exempt from the draft in America.)
User avatar #77 to #53 - bigmanfifty (10/17/2013) [-]
Do you know what the official reason for that is? At least in UK (where I'm from)

Because if women are on the front line, and get shot, the men will stop fighting to help them.

I think the Israeli army tried it, and they found the men would fall to pieces if they saw a female comrade get injured. Sorry I don't have a link.
#144 to #77 - luigiyoshi **User deleted account** (10/18/2013) [-]
Segregate. History has done well with it so far! The womens army and the mens army.
User avatar #96 to #77 - sonicserver (10/17/2013) [-]
this is actually pretty fascinating. gonna go research this. if i dig anything up i'll be back with sauce
User avatar #97 to #96 - bigmanfifty (10/17/2013) [-]
please do
User avatar #108 to #97 - sonicserver (10/17/2013) [-]



the first and the last contradict one another. but the first is far more current.

TL;DR: your statement was true in 1948, but things are different in their military today.
User avatar #30 to #28 - unncommon (10/17/2013) [-]
Most soldiers are men.
User avatar #31 to #30 - bigmanfifty (10/17/2013) [-]
Yeah, sure. But 99.999% of men are not, have never been, and will never be, soldiers.
User avatar #180 to #31 - commontroll (10/18/2013) [-]
Yeah, statistically speaking, more like 50% will never be. Military makes up a large portion of male populations, especially in nations where there's lots of war. Or during times like WW2.

But, military, construction, farming, oil rigging, and other highly dangerous jobs are almost all men dominated. He still picked a bad example though, I agree.
#250 to #180 - anonymous (10/18/2013) [-]
50%? That's just insane, how about countries at peace without conscription (China, Murrica, most of Europe already account for about half the world population) or with selective conscription or hell, even without army, they make up a pretty big chunk of the earth... 50% seems way to much.
User avatar #273 to #250 - commontroll (10/18/2013) [-]
And I'm talking about world wide, people in places like South America, Central Africa, the Middle East, all these people who aren't in an official military, but are in a militant group. And again, my statistics I'm saying (theoretically at least) are going back a long way. For these days, certainly not that high, but back in the day, almost everybody had gone to war. If we include the bloodiest century in history, I'm pretty sure it'd probably be around 50% of men fighting in a military.
User avatar #272 to #250 - commontroll (10/18/2013) [-]
50% of the men, and I'm speaking for the last 120 years or so. Those that have served, are serving, and will serve. The number is quite large. Especially if we get another world war on our hands. If that happened, or if America had a civil war/revolution/whatever, or same thing for China, or if Pakistan and India attacked all out on each other, and North Korea joined Pakistan, and we joined India. Right there we're talking about a war with countries that have a total of almost 2 billion people. That's assuming China doesn't get in on it to expand their borders into Indian territory. Then don't forget all the Middle East helping their Islamic brothers, then Russia going and joining, blah blah blah.

Long story short, we do have the possibility to be caught up in yet another world war because of political crap.
User avatar #106 to #31 - timmywankenobi (10/17/2013) [-]
I believe it is around 19-21% of men. will serve in the military at some point in their lives.
User avatar #87 to #31 - wobblewub (10/17/2013) [-]
Oh shut the **** up, you ain't **** .
User avatar #66 to #31 - sirkanesixtytwo (10/17/2013) [-]
Did you know that 55348289209.929292990109% of statistics on the internet are fake?
User avatar #41 to #31 - Einsty (10/17/2013) [-]
Stop crushing my dreams and I'm quite confident that number is a long way off.
User avatar #42 to #41 - Einsty (10/17/2013) [-]
Alright, did some searching, seems like it would be somewhre between 94% and 99%. So, your number is close enough.
User avatar #102 to #42 - therealmaster (10/17/2013) [-]
In 2011 there were 1,468,364 active duty members in the US armed forces.The total population of the US in 2011 was approximately 313,019,575 people. That is about .469% of the population, not including any retired service members.

https:// You need to login to view this link
User avatar #251 to #102 - Einsty (10/18/2013) [-]
I was thinking more worldwide.
 Friends (0)