Admirals, generals: Let gays serve openly

[editec]

I subscribe to the: "Don't ask, don't tell, cause I really don't give a shit" policy myself.

If the military drummed every overtly and covertly gay man or woman currently in uniform out today, it would likely fall apart. My guess is at least 10% of those in uniform now and forever will be homosexuals.

Gay men and woman have always been and will continue to be serving our nation honorable.

If you were ever in the service and you ever lived in barrracks, I promise you that you slept in the same room with gay people.

The fact that some of you didn't know it, should be a tip off that the problems that some of you so fear are basically groundless nonsense.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

I subscribe to the: "Don't ask, don't tell, cause I really don't give a shit" policy myself.

If the military drummed every overtely and coverntly) gay man or woman currently in uniform out today, it would likely fall apart.

Gay men and woman have always been and will continue to be serving our nation honorable.

If you were ever in the service and you ever lived in barrracks, I promise you that you slept in the same room with gay people.

The fact that some of you didn't know it, should be a tip off that the problems that some of you so fear is basically groundless nonsense.

If Mr Bass did bunk in the same room with gays[Mr Bass hasn't and knows this for sure 100%] they most likely kept it to themselves and thats all "Don't ask, Don't tell" is saying, for homos to keep their homosexuality to themselves, serve and shut up. They don't need to flaunt their sexuality as part of the uniform.

 

[Article 15]

How about don't ask don't tell and being gay isn't a punishable offense?

 

[CSM]

I subscribe to the: "Don't ask, don't tell, cause I really don't give a shit" policy myself.

If the military drummed every overtly and covertly gay man or woman currently in uniform out today, it would likely fall apart. My guess is at least 10% of those in uniform now and forever will be homosexuals.

Gay men and woman have always been and will continue to be serving our nation honorable.

If you were ever in the service and you ever lived in barrracks, I promise you that you slept in the same room with gay people.

The fact that some of you didn't know it, should be a tip off that the problems that some of you so fear are basically groundless nonsense.

You promise me that, do you.

IF they don't tell, how the heck do YOU know? Besides, if only 10% of the military are gay (as you say) then there is a 90% chance that a soldier is NOT sleeping in the same rooom as a homosexual.

I am merely pointing out that your assertions are a bit overstated.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

How about don't ask don't tell and being gay isn't a punishable offense?

No, there are certain things that go against the good order and discipline of the army and the thought of two men in uniform serving the country engaging in gay sex acts go against the good order and discipline of the military. Nobody is allowed to witch hunt gays so let them keep it to themselves.

 

[CSM]

How about don't ask don't tell and being gay isn't a punishable offense?

Possible solution that is worth consideration, methinks. However, just like heterosexuals, subject to the same disciplinary measures when found guilty of acts listed in UCMJ. That being said, understand that because this is such a contentious subject in this day and age, certain things ARE put at risk. Things like good order and discipline, unit cohesion and teamwork, even the safety of individual soldiers. While segregation was supposedly ended in the military there was a long period of adjustment before it was really in effect.

Yes folks, heterosexuals get charged, tried and convicted of things like adultery, child abuse, rape and even conduct unbecoming. Contrary to popular belief, male soldiers do bring women into the barracks and screw like rabbits...somtimes they get caught and are disciplined. They are not disciplined because they are heterosexual, they are disciplined because they violated military (and sometimes civilian) law.

 

[Sunni Man]

I subscribe to the: "Don't ask, don't tell, cause I really don't give a shit" policy myself.

If the military drummed every overtly and covertly gay man or woman currently in uniform out today, it would likely fall apart. My guess is at least 10% of those in uniform now and forever will be homosexuals.

Gay men and woman have always been and will continue to be serving our nation honorable.

If you were ever in the service and you ever lived in barrracks, I promise you that you slept in the same room with gay people.

I don't know what branch of service you were in, or what you MOS was, but it sure seemed to be packed with homos!!

All I know is that if we would have had a homo in our unit. A midnight blanket party would have been in order.

 

[random3434]

I don't know what branch of service you were in, or what you MOS was, but it sure seemed to be packed with homos!!

All I know is that if we would have had a homo in our unit. A midnight blanket party would have been in order.

So you're saying you want to get under the blanket with gay men and do some "packing" eh?

Interesting.................

 

[Ravi]

So you're saying you want to get under the blanket with gay men and do some "packing" eh?

Interesting.................

Funny, that's exactly what I thought when I read his post. I guess his real fantasy involves gay rape.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

Ok guys, keep the homoerotica in your posts to a minimum, discussing gay sex is strictly forbidden.

 

[Sunni Man]

We had one guy in our unit that was always causing a major disruption. Late one night a blanket was put over him by several soilders and he got the Hell beat out of him. It was so bad that he had to get medical help. Since he had been wrapped in a blanket. He was unable to identify the attackers. The next day he was transfered out of the unit and that was the last we ever saw of him.

 

[OohRah Mama]

PLEASE explain to me the "logic" in losing excellent Marines, especially in this two-war time, simply because of sexual preference. To me, it's as patently ridiculous as letting good Marines not reenlist by refusing to allow more tats. We're losing too many damn good Marines for stupid reasons.

Many of us on this thread understand that extremism is detrimental to ANY group, and the Corps doesn't need drama - they have a job to do, and they do it better than anyone else...and have for 233 years. I can see how somebody screaming for (any) special treatment can disrupt cohesion and mission effectiveness, Gunny. But that's not the question. The question is, why should a valuable warrior be kicked out simply because a CO finds out that warrior is gay?

 

[CSM]

We had one guy in our unit that was always causing a major disruption. Late one night a blanket was put over him by several soilders and he got the Hell beat out of him. It was so bad that he had to get medical help. Since he had been wrapped in a blanket. He was unable to identify the attackers. The next day he was transfered out of the unit and that was the last we ever saw of him.

All you heroes did was pass the problem guy to another unit. I am certain those that participated think what they did was a good thing but they created a climate of fear and distrust by doing what they did. Resorting to such measures tells me a lot about the unit, its leadership and its members....none of it good.

 

[Ravi]

Near as I can figure, our soldiers need to be protected from teh gay. Doesn't say much for their maturity, imo.

 

[Sunni Man]

All you heroes did was pass the problem guy to another unit. I am certain those that participated think what they did was a good thing but they created a climate of fear and distrust by doing what they did. Resorting to such measures tells me a lot about the unit, its leadership and its members....none of it good.

I wasn't one of the attackers. But I was glad to see him gone.

Hopefully he got a discharge.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

All you heroes did was pass the problem guy to another unit. I am certain those that participated think what they did was a good thing but they created a climate of fear and distrust by doing what they did. Resorting to such measures tells me a lot about the unit, its leadership and its members....none of it good.

Thats problem soldier should have been administratively separated from the military. the lack of good leadeship in the unit is the fault for that blanket party.

 

[CSM]

Near as I can figure, our soldiers need to be protected from teh gay. Doesn't say much for their maturity, imo.

Far too simplistic an analysis, Ravi. There are real concerns involved with this issue. They are not insurmountable, but they will not be addressed with "feel good", politically correct solutions. Simply legislating that it is ok to be gay in the military will not solve the problem.

You will have guys like Sunni describes (and professes to be) that will have to be addressed. Instead of losing one gay, you now risk losing the gay person and the x number of idiots that decided a blanket party was a good idea. You also now have to deal with the climate created by such an action (fear, mistrust, etc.) that can easily render a unit combat ineffective. So now you have an entire unit that that will have to be rebuilt and retrained. That could take months if not years. This is of course and extreme example but not beyond the bounds of reality of what could happen. How many units do you think the military (and this country) can afford to have disrupted or even rendered combat ineffective at one time?

If you look at the history of how desegragation was accomplished within the military, you will realize that it was a long painful process. In the end it was a good thing IMO but it took a long, long time to accomplish.

 

[xsited1]

I wonder why Crimson posted this.

 

[CSM]

Thats problem soldier should have been administratively separated from the military. the lack of good leadeship in the unit is the fault for that blanket party.

Indeed. The leadership should have addressed the problem. The leadership should certainly have been aware of the climate within the unit and taken measures to prevent such action. The blanket party indicates to me that the leadership in that unit either was out of touch with the soldiers involved, did not care about the unit or its soldiers or were just plain incompetent.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

Indeed. The leadership should have addressed the problem. The leadership should certainly have been aware of the climate within the unit and taken measures to prevent such action. The blanket party indicates to me that the leadership in that unit either was out of touch with the soldiers involved, did not care about the unit or its soldiers or were just plain incompetent.

More likely incompetent, or maybe they pretended not to know what to do when they for sure knew. It all goes back to knowing your troops.