Daily Chit-Chat Thread

As the 2016 election season heats up, I realize that another war starting later in this decade, and from there, another military draft, will probably be more likely than the beginning of the decade. With a new law that allows women to fight in combat roles and requires both men and women to register for the Selective Service on their 18th birthdays, the risks for me and everyone else with certain similarities getting sent into combat gets harder for me to figure out. These are my current arguments for why I would or wouldn't get pulled into combat:

I might because:
*If Trump beats Rodham, he seems like he'd be more likely to start another war than Rodham. This would primarily be a risk if Rodham supporters stayed home, or if gerrymandering continued to run rampant.
*Our military combatants are spread thin across the world, primarily across SW Asia. We might need a lot more fresh manpower to accommodate more war.
*I have a clean criminal record with a lean build as opposed to obesity.
*If women fight in combat, they might send me into combat because the change in physical strength standards would affect me similarly.
*I'm still a young adult, as opposed to pre-teen, high school teen, or middle-aged.
*I still haven't figured out whether a slim build, fresh appearance, and anxious, fright-prone personality will make me more likely or less likely to get sent into combat than a hardened personality with medium-to-muscular build and more experience. Under people who see combat as a rite of passage and the best way to toughen children up and build character, this'll increase my risk.

I might not because
*There might be things I can do to get sent to a non-combat role instead. The question is how exactly?
*I have too much to lose as a combat casualty. I've worked hard for over a decade to achieve a healthy body and young appearance, and I have a lot more life span at stake. In other words, I'm too healthy and youthful to die.
*I'm slightly-built rather than muscular, with a fresh face and a lack of real-world experience to match.
*I have mid-to-high functioning autism, and with my shortage of executive functioning, I'd be even more frightened in scary situations like the front lines of combat, but I know a lot of similar youth won't have that argument.
*It's possible that a college education reduces the risk of combat conscription, but in my case, this'll depend on whether an Associate of Arts would be enough.
*A much smaller share of war is ground-based than ever before. Nowadays, many elements of American wars are technological and aerial, which reduces, but doesn't eliminate, the need for infantry.

So how should I assess my own risks?

This is as political I'll get (as the forum admin I try to stay neutral when it comes to politics) but it should be noted Hillary did vote for the War in Iraq while Trump supposedly was against it. (It is easy for him to say when he wasn't in congress or the Senate at the time and was just an outside observer though). We currently have at least in the modern era the two most disliked presumptive nominees in American history, so we just have to hope that the country maintains itself whatever the results may be.

Everyone else can say yay Hillary or yay Trump (or screw Hillary or screw Trump) for all I care. My position is to stay neutral (I feel). All of you have less of a burden to since you don't have to run the site.

I agree, but to answer 912th's question, I wouldn't worry about it until the time comes (and hopefully it doesn't). There are many factors even if they did reinstate the draft. My dad was physically and mentally fit in basically all aspects but they denied him because he failed an eye test.

Now isn't a good time to celebrate my 600th post, so...

If it wasn't clear before, I've never intended to enlist. The concern is all about conscription.

To TopTenHunter: Unfortunately, the condition on whether Rodham or Trump would do anything hawkish doesn't ease the pain. I don't have any sense of the odds that either one would start a war.

To Scumhunter: How extensive is the testing? If I have even mild digestive problems, mild hearing weakness (people's voices often get muffled in my ears), severe executive functioning deficiency, a delicate sensitivity to pain, and a volatile fear for risking my life that brings out grievous anxiety, they wouldn't specifically send me into combat if I were drafted involuntarily, would they?

Depends on how desperate they are? It sounds like, overall, they'd categorize me into the "last resort" combatant reserves.