Chair of Joint Chiefs says Gays should be allowed to serve in military.

Since we're all grown adults in the military. Why can't we have co-ed showers too then? I mean, there's only 3 minutes to shower... so we shouldn't worry about anything.

BTW... these grown men you're all talking about are only 18 or 19 years old. Some of them in bootcamp are 17 and a 1/2.

 

You were in the Navy, right?

If they can't keep their junk in their pants on land, they aren't going to keep their junk in their pants at sea and should be kicked out of the Navy, posthaste. If they want to be in the Navy they need self control.

Or do you think we should start having group sex on ships and submarines at sea, since the poor babies can't control themselves from big bad temptation? We should probably also let them have cocaine, meth, and heroin on duty, too. You know... they can't control themselves, right? The poor drug addict isn't to blame, it's the Navy's fault for not protecting them from themselves in the first place.

 

what a great age for a young man/woman to learn about camaraderie and accepting their fellow soldiers for who they are...

 

Thank you. While I haven't gotten past this post in the thread, we finally get to the "nut" of what's been bothering me about the President and this issue. He can issue an executive order suspending enforcement of DADT. A perfect solution? No, but there is also not a good reason not to take what action he can, immediately, as in months ago.

 

Unless that executive order would make the actual repeal more difficult by coalescing opposition to it. Plus, basic leadership says you have to have buy-in from the people you're leading. He needs to get military leadership on board. He needs to get people used to the idea. He needs to get the proper personnel in place to deal with some of the negatives that will, unfortunately, come from it - there will be gay soldiers that get beat up. There will be commanders who treat gay soldiers improperly. That's the reality of change. Some of this will happen in warzones and in wartime conditions. You need to have procedures in place to deal with all that and have a system set up beforehand.

Without all that, it makes the implementation really clumsy, and that just gives lots of fodder to the people fighting against the repeal. They can just point to whatever problems do occur and use that to push public opinion against actual repeal. As we've seen, nothing is going to pass this Congress easily, and you need every duck in a row to make this happen.

I have no idea what the thought process in the administration is and whether they are serious or just playing politiics. But if they are serious, there are very legitimate reasons to not just issue a blanket executive order as a clumsy solution to the problem.

 

Major, I disagree. Not that there shouldn't be "buy-in from the people you're leading" "get military leadership on board" "get people used to the idea" and so on, but fundamentally, leadership comes from the President. From the top down. As for gay members of the military getting "beat up," **** happens in the military, as in life outside the services. You don't think people get beat up now? And many of those in the military affected by DADT are perfectly capable of taking care of themselves. If there is abuse, the leadership should insure that it is dealt with and controlled or eliminated. Regardless of the issue. You have to start somewhere and this was a huge issue with the base of my party (I know, not yours) during the election. The fact remains that he's waited until now to address it. He didn't have to.

 

Democrats: We need to work on healthcare reform
People: No, we want you to work on jobs
Democrats: No, really, we need to work on healthcare reform
People: Listen to us, we want jobs
Democrats: Too bad. We are working on healthcare reform
[Massachusetts elects Brown]
Democrats: Uhhh ok. Fine. Jobs it is
People: Yes, jobs. And stop spending so much money!

Democrats: Ok, Jobs? Fine, we will start working on jobs and work on the deficit. First, we'll put a freeze on spending.
Democrats: And uhh lets start working on a second stimulus package for jobs ... but we need to raise the debt limit first.
People: Listen, we need jobs. We don't need more debt. Cut spending. Quit wasting money on the war. Bring our troops...
Democrats: [interrupting] Did you just mention military? Speaking of, we need to retract DADT. Gays have a right to openly serve in the military. Lets gather the troops to get this done. We have a war going on. We need all the men we can get, regardless of your sexuality. Lets get this done!
People: $#$#@#$

 

Economics 101: Hello people - if you believe this, you fail me. Go back to junior high and let the adults talk. Regards.

 

Noted republican crazy Rick Santorum at CPAC this morning --

Military Was 'Indoctrinated' Into Supporting DADT Repeal

Former Republican senator Rick Santorum accused military leaders on Saturday of having become so "indoctrinated" with political correctness that they can no longer "see straight."

The Pennsylvania arch-conservative was specifically referring to the brass's support of a repeal of the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy. A long-time opponent of gay rights, Santorum expressed concern that changing the law would sap the readiness and effectiveness of the armed forces.

"My thoughts are this," he said, in a morning speech before Conservative Political Action Conference. "The military is there for one purpose and one purpose only, and that is to protect and defend the United States of America.

"We have a volunteer army," he added. "They can un-volunteer too."

Addressing how the military leadership, led by Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mike Mullen, could now favor a repeal of the law, Santorum raised the specter of brainwashing.

"Political correctness is reigning in the military right now," he said. ""Some people say: [Do] whatever the generals say [on DADT]. I'm not too sure that we haven't so indoctrinated the officer corps in this country that they can actually see straight to make the right decision."

 

Yes since career military men who are generals have been too indoctrinated we should let civilians like Santorum determine what's best for the military.

 

Mayzar can finally realize his dream of being a military man! :grin:

 

I'm glad I've only got a few more years until I retire.. I'll be damned if I'm going to have to be down range with a bunch of gay dudes...
oh BTW healthcare should be a HUGE concern with this problem... here is the current stats from CDC concerning MSM (men who have sex with men).. it's a little disturbing and a burden I don't think the Military should have to deal with... and in a combat zone where you may have to provide SABC (self ait buddy care) to someone would you want to take this risk? Its my job, and I won't do it!!! If you don't feel like reading the report here are the high points... enjoy

\MSM account for nearly half of the more than one million people living with HIV in the U.S. (48%, or an estimated 532,000 total persons).

MSM account for more than half of all new HIV infections in the U.S. each year (53%, or an estimated 28,700 infections).

MSM is the only risk group in the U.S. in which new HIV infections are increasing. While new infections have declined among both heterosexuals and injection drug users, the annual number of new HIV infections among MSM
has been steadily increasing since the early 1990s.

 

sorry forgot link... been drinking
http://www.cdc.gov/NCHHSTP/newsroom/docs/FastFacts-MSM-FINAL508COMP.pdf

 

Being in close corners with openly gay men is VERY disruptive to the 70-80% of us in the military who do not agree with it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

In a time of war, no one wants to take it in the foxhole unwillingly.

 

I'm sorry that you aren't professional enough to not deal with that. I think you are in the minority of people in the military though. Most people in the military don't see the Israeli or Great Britain's military as being more professional and able to handle open homosexuals serving in the armed forces.

I hope that you are able to work that out.

 

I think it's a matter of being comfortable with one's own sexuality more than any disruption by the homos, but that's just me.

 

That may well be at the heart of it. You are right.

I do still believe that most of our mean and women serving the military whether they are uncomfortable with their own sexuality or not, will have a higher degree of professionalism than pop rox.