Mullen: Troops Who Balk at Change in Gay Service Policy Can Find Other Work

[Goaldeje]

I hesitate to jump back into this one, but I have to respond to Lanky here. The problem as I see it Lanky, is that if there are unprofessional gays who are flamboyant, and make it a point to make their fellow soldiers uncomfortable. I would guess that under DADT, if this happened, the offending soldier would get hazed or get their ass kicked and that would pretty much take care of that.

Now, however if this happens, the flamboyant soldier can legitimately cry that he was singled out because he is gay, and get the rest of the soldiers in trouble. That's not such a good thing.

The more I think about it, I think the military needs to allow homosexuals, but as Elephant suggested a while back, let's not do it while we're at war. I can see putting this off for a couple of years.

But to deny them the right to apply for the privilege of serving is wrong.

 

[Sarge]

Oh, its such a headache to make sure women, minorities and gays are treated equally. Did you really just type that? Unbelievable.

Yes, I did. Not all women or minorities are like that, but a fair number of them know exactly how to play the game. When I was an ATC instructor in Ms, you had to be REAL careful around females, because they would pullout all the stops if they started failing the course. And unfortunately the way things work, when one of them says "Sarge said I had nice tits" or "Sarge asked me out" or whatever, guess what? Sarge was guilty until Sarge could prove otherwise or get them to change their story. One of the other ways the military diiferes from teh civilan world. It'll be the same with gays, only they'll be even more protected with Obama in office. Just more time out of your military life that you could be doing something else

Even IF a guy spends an extra second looking at your junk, its not going to hurt you, I promise. Everyone is there for the same reason; gay guys are just as professional as straight ones.

Here's the bottom line. It makes people uncomfortable. Why should 99% of the military be made uncomfortable for the benefit of a very few? Isn't military life hard enough? Why make it harder still?

 

[Sarge]

But to deny them the right to apply for the privilege of serving is wrong.

Sorry Goal, but no one has a "right" to serve. Doesn't work that way

 

[Goaldeje]

Sorry Goal, but no one has a "right" to serve. Doesn't work that way

Not what I said, try again.

 

[Sarge]

Not what I said, try again.

But to deny them the right to apply for the privilege of serving is wrong.

Did I miss something?

 

[fansince62]

Sorry Goal, but no one has a "right" to serve. Doesn't work that way

Sarge...as noted before...these folks have no clue. it's all an empty abstraction to them. they completely ignore...every time...the law of unintended consequences.....they do not participate themselves....they do not care about competing equities. sexual orientation/response: it's a congenital matter for LGBTs, but an intellectual one for you, me and all the other recidivist heteros! see how the logic is twisted? forget them...it's not a conversation worth having.

and then we can get on to the conversation about "social responsibility" and "burden sharing"...in a society in which...since 1973 and the end of conscription......Liberals do not participate at the pointy end at anything close to their presumed 20% presence in the greater population. exonerated, however, because they pay taxes and dress their autos with "I support the Troops" bumper stickers. clueless. clueless.

this is all a scam. the people in power are forcing their value structure on the rest of us - with the implied violence of the government to back it up. they are systematically operating to undermine core institutions and the economic/military power of this country all in the service of some vague, feel happy, notion of global government. this isn't hyperventilating. research the backgrounds, listen to what their mouthpieces in the media print and broadcast.....observe their actions.....take a look at the physical condition and modernization plans for the Services you serve/served.

they are the enemy within.

 

[Sarge]

take a look at the physical condition and modernization plans for the Services you serve/served.

Oh, I have, even though I've been retired for a few years now. Gates needs to be removed...........immediately. And not just for his DADT stance

 

[fansince62]

Oh, I have, even though I've been retired for a few years now. Gates needs to be removed...........immediately. And not just for his DADT stance

yea...they dropped the ball on the execution end of DADT. this was all about democratic party political expediency.

it is scary...is it not...where the material material condition of the force structure and force modernization are headed? thankfully...all our Internet traffic is routed through China so they will understand the threat to their investments and act to support us.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

Wow, I'm actually ashamed for you right now, fansince. Your posts border on hate-speak. I am glad circumstances didn't allow any of us to see your posts about the civil rights movement.
Posted via BGO Mobile Device

 

[fansince62]

Wow, I'm actually ashamed for you right now, fansince. Your posts border on hate-speak. I am glad circumstances didn't allow any of us to see your posts about the civil rights movement.
Posted via BGO Mobile Device

whatever Lanky. You've become something of a self caricature not to be taken seriously. I've seen your personality type on a million political boards....employing the same bombastic techniques. you are an object of amusement for some...and that's about it.

btw...unlike you...I'm on the inside.

see ya!

 

[Boone]

Keep to the topic at hand (which we graciously are keeping open) and knock off the personal comments.

I spent 10 years in the Marine Infantry as both an enlisted guy and officer. I think this is much ado about nothing. There are gay men serving today, there were gay men serving 100 years ago. No matter what the strategy or political policy, there will always be issues. There will be issues where a gay servicemember slips up and makes advances to another servicemember (just like happens in service environments where females and males work together). There will be issues where service members harass a fellow member known to be gay.

I just don't see why this should be some monumental threat. It's not.

As for the government imposing their values on us, Al - that's the very definition of government. Laws and policies are nothing more than values imposed. You just don't happen to agree with this one. Are their lots of service members up in arms about this particular topic? Sure. But as you know, the folks that hang out on internet message boards are there because they care intensely about the topics being discussed. This particular issue is one that, I suspect, you could change policies today, and after a month or two of intense media attention, things would normalize to the point folks in the military barely gave it a thought.

There are some valid points in this thread, on all sides. I don't know how a gay male lives alongside his peers in an all-male unit? It must be tough. But if they can do it without crossing any lines, why should you or I care? That person might be the best machine gunner in my company, or a great fire team or squad leader. That's really all I'd care about.

 

[Sarge]

I spent 10 years in the Marine Infantry as both an enlisted guy and officer. I think this is much ado about nothing. There are gay men serving today, there were gay men serving 100 years ago. No matter what the strategy or political policy, there will always be issues. There will be issues where a gay servicemember slips up and makes advances to another servicemember (just like happens in service environments where females and males work together). There will be issues where service members harass a fellow member known to be gay.

You know there's going to be issues. Issues that would not arise were gay people to stay under wraps.

I can't remember when you got out, but honestly John, there's just waaaay too much going on right now to deal with this and not have it take away from combat effectiveness

 

[Lanky Livingston]

In the spirit of Christmas, I'm going to leave this thread alone (and ignore the continuous personal attacks). I will say, however, that Sarge and FS62 bring up a lot of the same arguments used against integration. Just sayin' ... You may want to take a step back and look at your position.
Posted via BGO Mobile Device

 

[fansince62]

In the spirit of Christmas, I'm going to leave this thread alone (and ignore the continuous personal attacks). I will say, however, that Sarge and FS62 bring up a lot of the same arguments used against integration. Just sayin' ... You may want to take a step back and look at your position.
Posted via BGO Mobile Device

and in the same spirit I will only point out that skin color and sexual orientation are two completely different things. one is an attribute....the other a core matter of one's "being". And you are misconstruing the arguments I have made. but let's put this one to rest and enjoy the Holidays. Next year should be a year of progress (and you know that word drops like acid from my mouth) for the Skins. plenty to talk about there.

enjoy your Xmas and have a contemplative New Year!

 

[fansince62]

Keep to the topic at hand (which we graciously are keeping open) and knock off the personal comments.

I spent 10 years in the Marine Infantry as both an enlisted guy and officer. I think this is much ado about nothing. There are gay men serving today, there were gay men serving 100 years ago. No matter what the strategy or political policy, there will always be issues. There will be issues where a gay servicemember slips up and makes advances to another servicemember (just like happens in service environments where females and males work together). There will be issues where service members harass a fellow member known to be gay.

I just don't see why this should be some monumental threat. It's not.

As for the government imposing their values on us, Al - that's the very definition of government. Laws and policies are nothing more than values imposed. You just don't happen to agree with this one. Are their lots of service members up in arms about this particular topic? Sure. But as you know, the folks that hang out on internet message boards are there because they care intensely about the topics being discussed. This particular issue is one that, I suspect, you could change policies today, and after a month or two of intense media attention, things would normalize to the point folks in the military barely gave it a thought.

There are some valid points in this thread, on all sides. I don't know how a gay male lives alongside his peers in an all-male unit? It must be tough. But if they can do it without crossing any lines, why should you or I care? That person might be the best machine gunner in my company, or a great fire team or squad leader. That's really all I'd care about.

I don't have the energy to argue on this at the moment. Just note that it is not the mission of government to impose its values on us. The whole founding of this country is predicated on not having a government jam its value structure on the population. The present irony is that a system set up to prevent tyrannies of the majority has become captive to tyrannies of the minority. Read the Federalist Papers, Common Cause, etc., etc.

as for experience base, I can relate a whole different set of experiences accumulated over the course of 20+ years in the military...including gay officers systematically raping enlisted in large numbers.

the issue in my mind isn't ending DADT. they have no plan for executing this and they have not been succinct about the bounds. anyone who has had to live with these military as crucible for social engineering projects knows how fouled up they become largely because the engineers have a bad blueprint with way too many pages attached. integrating women is a great case in point. all for it....but it became so politicized that famous, beloved Admirals who were willing to take a stand on below par aviators at the boat had their careers ended at substantial cost to the country, squadron personnel who honored their commitments having to shoulder the extra load when pregnancies sprouted 2-3 weeks before cruise, ships hushing up prostitution rings being run out of the Captain's barge, certain in the middle of nowhere islands incurring the highest female enlistment rates in the Navy due to "income advantages", unqualified promotions to senior positions, political games being played with an evaluation system that is supposed to move the best forward. it's not that there aren't terrific female pilots or female leaders. there are. it's that the intention all along was to suffuse other, political objectives into the process - at a terrific cost to the integrity of the system. the do gooders could care less about the personal and community costs incurred on the merry path to "goodness". the same thing is gonna happen here. it's gonna end up being a mess. but you'll never know it because the press and the political interests are going to prevent any sort of open conversation on this.

People died along the way. The political elites absolutely DO NOT CARE. that's what gets me angry. I have lived it. The do gooders who pass a law and then march off to the next great cause haven't.

all of this end states in events like Ft Hood that the power elites cavalierly word-smith away as the President tried to do last year. but no one really cares about the people who died in Texas....they're part of a "process" of social enlightenment....

 

[Sarge]

More "homophobes" getting out. WHo's going to replace them and their years of experience?


http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=243213


President Obama's repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy is already damaging the U.S. military.

An Army lieutenant colonel has asked to be relieved of command rather than order his troops to go through pro-homosexual indoctrination following the repeal of the policy, which required homosexuals to keep silent about their sexual preference.

Currently the commander of a battalion-sized unit in the Army National Guard, the officer also has threatened to resign his commission rather than undergo "behavior modification" training intended to counter his religious convictions about homosexuality.

Discover what's causing modern America to disintegrate. Read "HOW EVIL WORKS: Understanding and Overcoming the Destructive Forces That Are Transforming America"

The soldier sent the following letter to his commanding officer:


Subject: Request for Relief from Command due to Personal Moral Conflict with New Homosexual Policy

 

[redskins26]

Henry, valid points as fs62 has mentioned. The only thing I would add to your comments is that I do not think this is the right time to repeal because we are at war.

50 years from now it will almost certainly be a foregone conclusion that gays are openly serving in the military, although there are many logistical issues that need to be worked out. Those logistics simply cannot distract the military during a war.

Hopefully 50 years from now we get back on track as society and people realize it is a choice

 

[redskins26]

Wow, I'm actually ashamed for you right now, fansince. Your posts border on hate-speak. I am glad circumstances didn't allow any of us to see your posts about the civil rights movement.
Posted via BGO Mobile Device

Are you ashamed because he speaks the truth or ashamed because his views are different than yours if 2 people have different views who is right and who is wrong?

I keep hearing other countries do it

Other countries are thionking about letting adult relatives marry each other (ie mom and son, Brother, sister) because As a society we have fallen so far that lies soon become the truth

 

[fansince62]

Are you ashamed because he speaks the truth or ashamed because his views are different than yours if 2 people have different views who is right and who is wrong?

I keep hearing other countries do it

Other countries are thionking about letting adult relatives marry each other (ie mom and son, Brother, sister) because As a society we have fallen so far that lies soon become the truth

redskins26...thanks for the support. but don't worry about this. it's an emotional outburst.....posted in the absence of any real military experience or context.....but it is his right to vex.

just like Lanky..stay connected to your own values and sense of right/wrong. you're whole and true to yourself as long as you walk that path!!.....

 

[Sarge]

Wrong thread