us his brother died in the Korean War which meant he did not have to serve in the US military since he was the only surviving son. But he chose military service to honor his brother. I think Asaf Ramon did the same, to honor his father. I hope both are in the inter-galactic wars now against the powers of darkness in the heavens and will accompany the Jewish Messiah to rescue Israel when all the nations of the world turn against God's land and people. You have not seen the last of the Ramons. Exodus 15:3 says the Lord is a man of war.

I love your talkbacks!

not between the IDF and the draftee's surviving parent or parents.

information. There is no special provision for only surviving sons. Her information is inaccurate and Y-net it isn't the first time she's wrong you should know better than to put up her garbage!

selective services on the matter There are no special provisions made by the US Armed forces for surviving sons.

in WW2 who all served and died on the same battleship, which set a precedent for a provision in US military law that states siblings may not serve simultaneously in the same combat unit. I have this on anectodal evidence only, but I'm pretty sure it is true.

according to USA selective services documents there is no surviving son or sibling policy as it exists in the State of Israel which is what #1 claims. You are correct there are two USA navy ships named after the Sullivan brothers...and as a result of there deaths there is a USA selective services policy which prevents siblings from serving simultaneously on the same vessel or unit. However there is no US policy which EXEMPTS a surviving son, sibling, or daughter from active duty in war time. During peace time when there was a draft in the USA a surviving child or sibling may request an exemption and the USA selective services considers it but does not have to grant it. This is completely different from Israel where the surviving children or siblings are required to receive permission from their surviving parent or parents in order to service in any combat unit. My point was to indicate that #1's position is a completely inaccurate representation of the USA selective services law as passed and amended from time to time by the Congress of the United States.