Obama to seek repeal of "Don't ask, Don't Tell"

[Col Hogan]

Haven't read the whole thread and this will be my only post in it....


I think getting rid of DADT would be a good thing for the military. HOWEVER, DADT is NOT keeping gays from serving, as there are THOUSANDS of them in the military right now, including a good friend of mine. DADT means no one can ask ANYONE about their orientation and no one is allowed to say if they are straight or gay. If anyone asks an officer or fellow soldier were to ask if you were gay they are to be discharged from the military. The part of DADT that becomes dicey more than others is during family functions. During family functions married men bring their wives and children in but homosexuals can not bring their partners in, because they would then be discharged.


While DADT is flawed it doesn't allow for anyone, gay or straight, to discuss orientation or ask about orientation.


I'm sure someone, probably dback (who does know more about this than I, admitedly) will bust my ass over this post, but just sharing my thoughts based on what I learned in my Diversity in American Cultures and Society class.



EDIT: I would also like to add that right or wrong, DADT is possibly protecting gays that are in the military. There are some sever bigots in the military that would take the dishonorable discharge to beat the hell out of a fellow soldier if they knew they were gay. There are soldiers, who sadly, wouldn't want to serve along side of a gay soldier, or save them. It is terrible to say that, but it is the truth. I gradated high school with a class that had 22 males in it, 8 of them are in the military and I hear that kind of stuff from them all the time. I have gay friends in the military and I hear it from them all the time too. One of them doesn't want it overturned because he fears for the loss of his friendships/comradeship with other soldiers.



Like I said, it is a sad state of affairs right now, and I hope it gets worked out properly.

You have hit a few things I did not go into detail on in my previous posts...

In certain areas of the military, machoismo is "overflowing"...gay jokes, and anti-gay sentiment is strong...

It is not something that you can simply "issue an order" and it will go away...

Women are just now being accepted into positions in places like fighter squadrons in the Air Force, which are bastions of macho guys...

In an infantry company, full of "macho" young men, gays will be "at risk" ...its a fact, not one I'm proud of, but its fact...

So to put them there during combat only makes the risk higher...

And by the way...you really do want those young men full of "macho" ...that's how they daily put themselves into harms way...go places most of you would never go...

[bench]

Now that I have your attention, here are my objections to the aforementioned clueless posts: None of the prescriptive posts from those who have never served, never lived in an open bay military barracks, never sacrificed their own civil liberties and comfort so that their fellow citizens may live in freedom and comfort, never faced death for a greater cause - none of you have shown the slightest appreciation or awareness of the depravations faced by operational military personnel, the conscious sacrifices already made by military personnel, the consequences of loading social engineering experiments onto the backs of those who already carry a figurative and sometimes literal 100-pound pack, the importance of unit cohesion, or the primacy of mission success.

When someone thinks they've earned the automagical moral high ground and a special lifetime pass just because they served, that's when I stop giving a shit about their sacrifices.

They say Old soldiers never die, and as much as I'm now publicly opposed to this policy it stands to reason — apparently the more self-congratulatory amongst them won't shut the fuck up long enough to let Death get a word in edgewise

[bobbythekidd]

No gays. No women. It's not a good fit for them. Period.

[Appaholic]

Now that I have your attention, here are my objections to the aforementioned clueless posts: None of the prescriptive posts from those who have never served, never lived in an open bay military barracks, never sacrificed their own civil liberties and comfort so that their fellow citizens may live in freedom and comfort, never faced death for a greater cause - none of you have shown the slightest appreciation or awareness of the depravations faced by operational military personnel, the conscious sacrifices already made by military personnel, the consequences of loading social engineering experiments onto the backs of those who already carry a figurative and sometimes literal 100-pound pack, the importance of unit cohesion, or the primacy of mission success.

When someone thinks they've earned the automagical moral high ground and a special lifetime pass just because they served, that's when I stop giving a shit about their sacrifices.

They say Old soldiers never die, and as much as I'm now publicly opposed to this policy it stands to reason — apparently the more self-congratulatory amongst them won't shut the fuck up long enough to let Death get a word in edgewise

A-fokking-men! I'll kiss a WWII or even a Korean War vet's ass anyday of the week. I'll thank a current soldier for "my freedom's they've protected" when they thank me for "their salary my taxes paid"....works both ways...

[Col Hogan]

When someone thinks they've earned the automagical moral high ground and a special lifetime pass just because they served, that's when I stop giving a **** about their sacrifices.

They say Old soldiers never die, and as much as I'm now publicly opposed to this policy it stands to reason — apparently the more self-congratulatory amongst them won't shut the **** up long enough to let Death get a word in edgewise

A-fokking-men! I'll kiss a WWII or even a Korean War vet's ass anyday of the week. I'll thank a current soldier for "my freedom's they've protected" when they thank me for "their salary my taxes paid"....works both ways...

They pay taxes too...

[mainejeff]

I think that all homosexual men and women should just leave the military........then we'd have a Draft (breeders only please!) to prop up the numbers needed for multiple wars currently underway.

[native]

Interesting. Still no awareness or acknowledgement by those who have never served regarding the issues of operational readiness, unit cohesion, or consideration for the etc. No substance. Only feelings. Sad, really.

And yes, Montaineer, if I think you have sufficient experience in finance, I will weight your opinion accordingly. However, I am surprised and disappointed at your response, in particular, because I expected more. None of the points you are making are more important than combat effectiveness and unit cohesion. None.

Points taken, Appy. I have already acknowledged as much in previous posts. But shame on you for feeding Bench.

Bench, MJ, glad I could elicit a response! Typically useless, however.

[GrizFanStuckInUtah]

I am pretty sure when I was in there were several people that were gay serving with me. They were outstanding soldiers and did their job and didn't have any problems. They also didn't say anything about it and the unit was fine because they were good soldiers. But I do wonder if they were openly trying to put it out there how much it might have impacted things. I could personally care less as long as they do their job but I also understand that the big picture is "We need our military to function properly." and I could give a crap less who's feelings get hurt as long as it continues to function properly. If we can do it without a DADT policy, I have no problems with that. I sure as hell don't want to put anyone at risk so we need to be damn careful while we have people in harms way.

[Grizalltheway]

Do we have any actual gay veterans with operational experience who would like to post here and add their credible and relevant thoughts? Their opinions would be preferable to those of the self righteous armchair jackasses who have never served and never sacrificed a g***damm thing for their country, whining about things they do not understand and cramming their theories down our throats?

I can accept all the drivel you numbnut idiots have posted if it's coming from a combat vet, but the rest of you pussies can just eat sh!t and die!

Wow, what a wonderful example of tolerant, loving Christian behavior!

[ASUMountaineer]

Interesting. Still no awareness or acknowledgement by those who have never served regarding the issues of operational readiness, unit cohesion, etc. No substance. Only feelings. Sad, really.

And yes, Montaineer, if I think you have sufficient experience in finance, I will weight your opinion accordingly.

Bench, glad I could elicit a response! Typically useless, however.

Still no awareness of your own self-righteousness. I've admitted I didn't serve, and even said I'm ok with deferring to those involved in regards to DADT. Again, this is a public message board for posting opinions. Seeing as how most of us are adults, I thought you could handle a differing opinion.

I don't need to pump myself, as you do. I acknowledged that I have never served (again you have a serious need to state this). You're complete disregard of anyone who 1) disagrees with you or 2) you feel is beneath you is what's really sad.

And, if you "expected more" from me...the feeling is mutual. As a military man, I'd hoped you'd bring more to the table than playground tactics and letting Col. Hogan make your points for you.

I asked you those questions about 2 pages of posts ago...and it took you that long to get over name calling to finally answer (which as I pointed out you gave one sentence - backing what Col. Hogan had said). You want substance? What substance are you seeking? You've already made it clear that we are "numbnut idiots" that can't possibly understand anything to do with the military because we haven't served. That's why I asked you for substance, based on your extensive knowledge. Your substance was calling names and piggybacking Col. Hogan.

I didn't ask you to take into account my experience in finance, I was commenting on your point about "clueless pussies." You, as you did with the communication skills about 5 pages ago, missed the point. If YOU have never worked in finance (as I have) then YOUR opinion would be clueless and of no merit to me, by you own standards, of course.

[native]

Interesting. Still no awareness or acknowledgement by those who have never served regarding the issues of operational readiness, unit cohesion, etc. No substance. Only feelings. Sad, really.

And yes, Montaineer, if I think you have sufficient experience in finance, I will weight your opinion accordingly.

Bench, glad I could elicit a response! Typically useless, however.

Still no awareness of your own self-righteousness. I've admitted I didn't serve, and even said I'm ok with deferring to those involved in regards to DADT. Again, this is a public message board for posting opinions. Seeing as how most of us are adults, I thought you could handle a differing opinion.

I don't need to pump myself, as you do. I acknowledged that I have never served (again you have a serious need to state this). You're complete disregard of anyone who 1) disagrees with you or 2) you feel is beneath you is what's really sad.

And, if you "expected more" from me...the feeling is mutual. As a military man, I'd hoped you'd bring more to the table than playground tactics and letting Col. Hogan make your points for you.

I asked you those questions about 2 pages of posts ago...and it took you that long to get over name calling to finally answer (which as I pointed out you gave one sentence - backing what Col. Hogan had said). You want substance? What substance are you seeking? You've already made it clear that we are "numbnut idiots" that can't possibly understand anything to do with the military because we haven't served. That's why I asked you for substance, based on your extensive knowledge. Your substance was calling names and piggybacking Col. Hogan.

I didn't ask you to take into account my experience in finance, I was commenting on your point about "clueless pussies." You, as you did with the communication skills about 5 pages ago, missed the point. If YOU have never worked in finance (as I have) then YOUR opinion would be clueless and of no merit to me, by you own standards, of course.

Your criticism is fair enough, ASUMountaineer. I apologize for not being fair to you.

[ASUMountaineer]

Still no awareness of your own self-righteousness. I've admitted I didn't serve, and even said I'm ok with deferring to those involved in regards to DADT. Again, this is a public message board for posting opinions. Seeing as how most of us are adults, I thought you could handle a differing opinion.

I don't need to pump myself, as you do. I acknowledged that I have never served (again you have a serious need to state this). You're complete disregard of anyone who 1) disagrees with you or 2) you feel is beneath you is what's really sad.

And, if you "expected more" from me...the feeling is mutual. As a military man, I'd hoped you'd bring more to the table than playground tactics and letting Col. Hogan make your points for you.

I asked you those questions about 2 pages of posts ago...and it took you that long to get over name calling to finally answer (which as I pointed out you gave one sentence - backing what Col. Hogan had said). You want substance? What substance are you seeking? You've already made it clear that we are "numbnut idiots" that can't possibly understand anything to do with the military because we haven't served. That's why I asked you for substance, based on your extensive knowledge. Your substance was calling names and piggybacking Col. Hogan.

I didn't ask you to take into account my experience in finance, I was commenting on your point about "clueless pussies." You, as you did with the communication skills about 5 pages ago, missed the point. If YOU have never worked in finance (as I have) then YOUR opinion would be clueless and of no merit to me, by you own standards, of course.

Your criticism is fair enough, ASUMountaineer. I apologize for not being fair to you.

No worries. My thing with DADT is I don't want to sell the military short, and I don't want to turn away qualified soldiers/ personnel because of something like this. If people are volunteering to serve, and can do so well, I'd hate to think something like this could hinder that.

I'll admit I don't know how it would affect the front lines, or back jobs in the military. However, I would hope it's something that could be changed...even eventually. And, having an open discussion about it can help.

It seems like a rather small problem to me, and the policy seems even smaller (perhaps both are wrong). I don't have an agenda to push when it comes to "gay rights," I just want us to be/ have the most effective, efficient, and economical government we can be--including the military.

[houndawg]

Very slick argument.

I am not concerned about what consenting adults choose to do with each other in the privacy of their own bedrooms, and "Don't ask, Don't tell" may or may not be the best policy for the military, but no amount of legal mumbo jumbo, faux "civil rights," political bolshevism or LGBT acting out will improve society, resolve the personal problems of self-idenified LGBTs, or scratch dbjon's itch.

There's truth in that statement.

There are queers in the military. There always have been. Repealing DADT will not change a thingin terms of homos being in the armed forces. They will still be there in the same capacities that they were before the repeal. This is nothing more than more fluff from Obama to try to win back the gays that he has been losing for the last year. Repealling DADT takes no courage and no conviction, because it is a policy without effect or teeth. Nobody will even notice that it is gone. It is just a political ploy to placate the left.

Some of them are damn good officers, too.

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

No gays. No women. It's not a good fit for them. Period.

[ATrain]

While I have never served in the military, I have sacrificed and served our country as a volunteer EMT and fortunately the world of volunteer and career EMS has no DADT policy (and if there were, our country on the homefront would be in sad shape, b/c there are several gay and lesbian EMTs/Paramedics out there who do a FANTASTIC job). I can say that the squad I run with in the backwoods of the heart of conservative Virginia wasn't fractured, divided, or became less cohesive as the result of a gay man joining.

One of the stories I heard was from Mary Lou Waller, who had a gay daughter that committed suicide. She went to a military funeral for a gay soldier, and as taps played the flag draping the young man's casket was folded and presented not his partner of 6+ years, but to his sister. DADT in action.

That story was told at the Gay Christian Network, where we had gay members of the military in attendance. They wore their nametags with red lanyards, meaning that their pictures were not to be taken for fear of being found out and thus discharged from the military. This was not just the gay soldiers, but also a couple military straight supporters. Is it right that they have to hide like that, even in their private lives? Absolutely not.

Finally, I work with two combat veterans. Both are straight, married men who support the repeal of DADT.

Throughout history, there has been change in people's attitudes and society has progressed and been better off as a result. Women serving as police officers was not a kosher idea when my grandmother became a sheriff's deputy, yet today we have several highly qualified women in all levels of law enforcement across the nation. Whether its gradual or rapid, the repeal of DADT will allow qualified and willing patriotic Americans to serve their nation proudly.

[mainejeff]

While I have never served in the military, I have sacrificed and served our country as a volunteer EMT and fortunately the world of volunteer and career EMS has no DADT policy (and if there were, our country on the homefront would be in sad shape, b/c there are several gay and lesbian EMTs/Paramedics out there who do a FANTASTIC job). I can say that the squad I run with in the backwoods of the heart of conservative Virginia wasn't fractured, divided, or became less cohesive as the result of a gay man joining.

One of the stories I heard was from Mary Lou Waller, who had a gay daughter that committed suicide. She went to a military funeral for a gay soldier, and as taps played the flag draping the young man's casket was folded and presented not his partner of 6+ years, but to his sister. DADT in action.

That story was told at the Gay Christian Network, where we had gay members of the military in attendance. They wore their nametags with red lanyards, meaning that their pictures were not to be taken for fear of being found out and thus discharged from the military. This was not just the gay soldiers, but also a couple military straight supporters. Is it right that they have to hide like that, even in their private lives? Absolutely not.

Finally, I work with two combat veterans. Both are straight, married men who support the repeal of DADT.

Throughout history, there has been change in people's attitudes and society has progressed and been better off as a result. Women serving as police officers was not a kosher idea when my grandmother became a sheriff's deputy, yet today we have several highly qualified women in all levels of law enforcement across the nation. Whether its gradual or rapid, the repeal of DADT will allow qualified and willing patriotic Americans to serve their nation proudly.

Many don't want to hear the REAL story.......just the Fox News/Religious Right version.

[ASUMountaineer]

While I have never served in the military, I have sacrificed and served our country as a volunteer EMT and fortunately the world of volunteer and career EMS has no DADT policy (and if there were, our country on the homefront would be in sad shape, b/c there are several gay and lesbian EMTs/Paramedics out there who do a FANTASTIC job). I can say that the squad I run with in the backwoods of the heart of conservative Virginia wasn't fractured, divided, or became less cohesive as the result of a gay man joining.

One of the stories I heard was from Mary Lou Waller, who had a gay daughter that committed suicide. She went to a military funeral for a gay soldier, and as taps played the flag draping the young man's casket was folded and presented not his partner of 6+ years, but to his sister. DADT in action.

That story was told at the Gay Christian Network, where we had gay members of the military in attendance. They wore their nametags with red lanyards, meaning that their pictures were not to be taken for fear of being found out and thus discharged from the military. This was not just the gay soldiers, but also a couple military straight supporters. Is it right that they have to hide like that, even in their private lives? Absolutely not.

Finally, I work with two combat veterans. Both are straight, married men who support the repeal of DADT.

Throughout history, there has been change in people's attitudes and society has progressed and been better off as a result. Women serving as police officers was not a kosher idea when my grandmother became a sheriff's deputy, yet today we have several highly qualified women in all levels of law enforcement across the nation. Whether its gradual or rapid, the repeal of DADT will allow qualified and willing patriotic Americans to serve their nation proudly.

Many don't want to hear the REAL story.......just the Fox News/Religious Right version.

Same old, same old from MJ. Generalizations, hatred of disagreement, and constant sorrow are what matters in his pitiful world. I bet it blows your mind to read about conservative Christians, like myself, who support ending DADT.

[CID1990]

One thing is fo sho':

We will need to repeal DADT or at least suspend it when we invade Iran. Nothing would be cooler than marching into Tehran with a whole brigade of fags leading the way. Those Revolutionary Guard fvckers would sh!t twice and die.

[BDKJMU]

I think that all homosexual men and women should just leave the military........then we'd have a Draft (breeders only please!) to prop up the numbers needed for multiple wars currently underway.

If all homos left the military, you're only talking a couple percent, and that wouldn't cause a draft.

Women on the other hand, they make up about 15% of an active duty force of about 1.5 million. But 20 years ago the military had an active duty of about 2 million, with about 11% women. In other words, in 1990 there were about 1.8 million men serving in active duty with a US population that was 250+ million. It wouldn't be impossible to get 1.5 million men serving on active duty without a draft in a population of around 310 million.

In the taste of the military I got (6 years in the VA Army National Guard, infantry), I don't recall much, if any, interaction with women. I certainly don't oppose women in the military. I'm ok with the current set up. They currently can serve on American combat ships, They aren't permitted to serve on subs or in special ops units. Women enlisted soldiers are barred from serving in Infantry, Special Forces, Armor, and the majority of artillery units.

[native]

While I have never served in the military, I have sacrificed and served our country as a volunteer EMT and fortunately the world of volunteer and career EMS has no DADT policy (and if there were, our country on the homefront would be in sad shape, b/c there are several gay and lesbian EMTs/Paramedics out there who do a FANTASTIC job). I can say that the squad I run with in the backwoods of the heart of conservative Virginia wasn't fractured, divided, or became less cohesive as the result of a gay man joining.

One of the stories I heard was from Mary Lou Waller, who had a gay daughter that committed suicide. She went to a military funeral for a gay soldier, and as taps played the flag draping the young man's casket was folded and presented not his partner of 6+ years, but to his sister. DADT in action.

That story was told at the Gay Christian Network, where we had gay members of the military in attendance. They wore their nametags with red lanyards, meaning that their pictures were not to be taken for fear of being found out and thus discharged from the military. This was not just the gay soldiers, but also a couple military straight supporters. Is it right that they have to hide like that, even in their private lives? Absolutely not.

Finally, I work with two combat veterans. Both are straight, married men who support the repeal of DADT.

Throughout history, there has been change in people's attitudes and society has progressed and been better off as a result. Women serving as police officers was not a kosher idea when my grandmother became a sheriff's deputy, yet today we have several highly qualified women in all levels of law enforcement across the nation. Whether its gradual or rapid, the repeal of DADT will allow qualified and willing patriotic Americans to serve their nation proudly.

Nice post. Thanks for sharing, ATrain.

[Skjellyfetti]

Y'all would have been against desegregating the military as well.

"Whites and blacks can't get along! Too much hatred! Keep 'em separate!"

STFU already.

[dbackjon]

Why repeal DADT?

Because it is the RIGHT THING TO DO.


Nothing else matters - fairness and equality is ALWAYS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

Anything else is UnAmerican

[Col Hogan]

Why repeal DADT?

Because it is the RIGHT THING TO DO.


Nothing else matters - fairness and equality is ALWAYS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

Anything else is UnAmerican

And to hell with the consequences...

[dbackjon]

Why repeal DADT?

Because it is the RIGHT THING TO DO.


Nothing else matters - fairness and equality is ALWAYS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

Anything else is UnAmerican

And to hell with the consequences...

Yes.

There are always consequences from ANY action. This should have been repealed years ago. There were consequences when the military was desegregated. Just because some people don't like the action is no excuse for INACTION, when the cause is just and correct.

You overstate the consequences. There will be grumbling. Probably a few fights. Few soldiers may not re-inlist. But I have faith that the overwhelming majority will shrug, and go back to do what they do best, being the best damn military in the world.

[GannonFan]

As I said before, just do it the way Truman handled the desgregtion of the military. Obama has all the power to just come right out with an Executive Order and overturn this, and then let Gates and whatever board needs to be set up go about the job of determining how to implement the Order. It took at least 4 years from the time Truman issued his Order to when the military said they were desgregated, and it certainly impacted the ranks for many years after that, but in the end it got done. No reason why we can't follow the same road map here. I'm not sure why Obama doesn't use some of the power he has as President and just starts this in motion with some real authority. Get 'er done.