Gay's in the Military, What the troops think about Civilians making that decision.

And for the record my comment on the probability of violence against gays is starting to get taken out of context. I was mearly pointing out that many in combat arms are not as tolerant as the average American. And historically violence is most often the result of such intolernce. As evidenced by abu grab there are ample sh*tbags in the service. I think everyone here can agree that violence based on intolerance is wrong.

 

This is the thread that never ends, it just goes on & on my friend! That's right I pulled out some lamb chops!

 

i find it hard to believe you have ever seen or talked to a gay man. in fact, i'm pretty sure you have gotten your entire perception of hte gay community from the one episode of Will and Grace you accidentally watched that one time

 

You're joking here, right? The characteristics of a female in the mind? What does that even mean? Let me get this straight: you don't want a person with any trace of femininity calling in your 9-line or CFF. Well what about the female pilot that's flying your medevac bird? Or the female A-10 pilot who's flying your gun runs? "Nope sorry, send us another one, we just can't have someone with a trace of femininity talking on my radio." Get over yourself man. You aren't nearly as hard as you think you are. You're so wrapped up in hating POGs and telling us all how brave you are that you forget for every 1 trigger puller there are 100 supporters making sure that you have the food, water, and ammunition to conduct your mission. I gather from your posts that you've probably not the most basic understanding of what it takes to support a unit at the front. It must be the ammo fairy that makes sure you've got a basic load and Santa Claus bringing you MREs.

Edit: And PS, apparently you don't "laugh at the little girls Department of the Navy", R. Lee Ermey is out there lobbying for the department to be combined into the Department of the Navy and Marine Corps. Guess you guys feel left out of the shopping.

 

Whoa... Easy on the Corps there hard charger... Last time I checked, even Marine cooks and Admin POGUEs hit the range AT LEAST once a year. That's more than some services I know... And we don't give away ribbons for graduating recruit training/MOS school:

P.S. - Oh wait, look at the colors!!

 

haha! thats pretty funny.

 

Uniform has combat action ribbon and FMF badge thingy. Corpsman??

 

It's not about rape or assault, it's about maintaining appropriate relationships and professional appearance in each other's eyes.

If I were a Joe and had a female squad leader, I'd certainly feel different around her if I was seeing her naked every morning in the shower. It would be fraternization to the umpteenth level.

The absolute least thing you want is a superior or subordinate pursuing romantic or sexual interests on the job. It already happens all the time even with all the measures in place to impede it. Why compound the situation?

Gays can already serve. It's the military - personal sacrifice is our corner stone. I don't think it's too much to ask (don't ask, don't tell) in order to avoid compounding situations.

This is an issue that needs to be tackled eventually. I don't think right now is the right time, practically (fighting two wars) or socially. When the wars are over, we'll have more time to focus on social issues. Right now we have to focus on taking these young men and women abroad and getting them back home alive.

 

My post wasn't an attack on the Corps, and your response doesn't immediately address anything I brought up.
I don't speak for the entire Army, but in my infantry BN, our cooks and admin types went to the range AT LEAST once a year. I don't know about you, but I would say once a year is a far cry from making anyone a proficient rifleman. But maybe that's just me.
As for the Army Service Ribbon, I couldn't agree with you more. But then again everyone in all the services wears a NDSM as soon as they finish basic. Don't see you mention that.
I've got a lot of friends who are Marine Officers and chose a Marine MAJ to administer my oath of office. I've got no beef with the Corps and realize that they, like all the services, have their share of outstanding individuals with the occasional turd mixed in.

 

A majority of this thread has strayed wayyyy off topic. *Ahem*

*If the system works that we have now, why should it be revised when it isn't broke?

*Someone who has different sexual views than I has EVERY right to serve, protect, and die for this country (Just the same as all of us who took that oath)

That's really all I've got to say...

 

interesting read from Navytimes

 

This may sound "Gay", but all I have to say is peace and love to all.

 

Your are right, it does sound GAY! J/K

 

The occasional turd... Couldn't agree more. And a soldier/Marine SHOULD be going to the range as often as possible.

The only reason I did not mention the NDSM is because in Peace Time, you don't get one when you graduate boot camp.

Also, I failed to address your other content. I agree... I don't care who is flying in Air Support - just get me some ordinance on target.

Regardless, I don't agree with gays serving OPENLY in the military. There is no added value to our fighting forces by changing this policy. They should keep it private (as with heterosexual members) and no one should ask.

The only thing this WILL do is save money, leading me to believe that this policy change is not for the rights of gays, but rather reduce spending in light of the recent wars and subsequent deficit:
In February 2005, the Government Accountability Office released estimates on the cost of the policy. Cautioning that the amount may be too low, the GAO reported $95.4 million in recruiting costs and $95.1 million for training replacements for the 9,488 troops discharged from 1994 through 2003.[53]
In February 2006, a University of CaliforniaBlue Ribbon Commission including Lawrence Korb, a former assistant defense secretary during the Reagan administration, former Defense SecretaryWilliam Perry, a member of the Clinton administration, and professors from the United States Military Academy at West Point concluded that figure should be closer to $363 million, including $14.3 million for "separation travel" once a service member is discharged, $17.8 million for training officers, $252.4 million for training enlistees and $79.3 million in recruiting costs.[53] The commission report stated that the GAO didn't take into account the value the military lost from the departures.

 

I think the military should make their own decision and that goes for everything they do.
You cannot let a left wing or right wing car salesman make a military decision when they are NOT there. Gays are the armed forces business period.
The HEALTH CARE bill has a para military civilian clause in it!!!!!!!!!
It states it is for possible medical reasons ,but that is horseshit.
I am not military ,but I would join the civilian para military force just so I could defend the "people" against the government because that is what the military does-again , they are telling the military their role to play .
The government wants you guys home to play their control game when people like me go against what they believe.
I am so proud of the military and those in past/present wars and I am disgusted how this administration (especially democrats) treat any soldier.
Just to add ..I give discounts in my business to all military and NEVER let them pay tax-unfortunately I cannot disclose my Business after saying that.
You people are the best and have all the heart

 

Appreciate that you respect the military...but it appears you don't understand alot of the situation.
1) The reason this thread is asking about the troops opinions is to get troops opinions...and to stay a-political.

2) I'll say this again- Like it or not- civilians ARE the top spots in the military chain of command. This isn't being put to a nationwide vote or a petition...It was directed by the Commander in Chief....And in the military that's how it works.

3) You are just a little late (at least for this round)-Several policy modifications were announced last week. Right now DADT is still in place but the investigation methodology and the level of proof is a bit higher now. It's a step in the right direction...

 

There's a difference between being gay and being a slut. Just as I can work alongside women and not engage in sex, I'm sure the same holds true for working alongside gays. Probably already happened during my 14 years of service and I just didn't know the guy was gay. It just doesn't make a difference in the workplace.

I remember listening to my father and grandfather (both Marines before me) talking about their time on active duty and how they detested working around "darkies." My grandfather even considered black Marines to be an affront to the uniform! But by my day we were all Marines. Some of us were light green and some of us were dark green, but we were all Marines and we were all judged by our merit as individuals.

Like it or not, the military is a powerful engine of social change.

Pete

 

keep in mind, civilians are possible future miltary candidates, so i think its pretty important to get their input. all soldiers were civilians at one point