Dutch Reject Retired General's Claim Re: Gays

[Political Junky]

washingtonpost.com

Dutch reject retired U.S. general's claim that having gay soldiers led to Srebrenica massacre
Video
Retired general blames massacre on gays
A retired U.S. general's claim that gay Dutch soldiers were partly to blame for allowing Europe's worst massacre since World War II has sparked outrage in the Netherlands. (March 19)



By Henry Chu
Saturday, March 20, 2010

LONDON -- Top Dutch officials ditched their usual diplomacy Friday in an angry reaction to suggestions by a retired U.S. Marine Corps general that allowing openly gay troops to serve in their military was partly to blame for Europe's worst massacre since World War II.

The statement was made by John J. Sheehan before a Senate hearing Thursday on the U.S. military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy regarding gay men and lesbians in its ranks. Sheehan opposes President Obama's pledge to end the policy and tried to use the Dutch case as a cautionary tale.

But he triggered outrage on both sides of the Atlantic for his suggestion that incorporating openly gay troops had affected the Dutch army's battle readiness and facilitated the mass killing of 8,000 Bosnian men and boys by Serb forces in Srebrenica in 1995.

Dutch troops were part of the inadequate U.N. peacekeeping force stationed in Srebrenica.

Sheehan said at the hearing that the Netherlands' decision to "socialize" its military "led to a force that was ill-equipped to go to war."

He added: "The case in point that I'm referring to is when the Dutch were required to defend Srebrenica against the Serbs. The battalion was understrength, poorly led, and the Serbs came into town, handcuffed the soldiers to the telephone poles, marched the Muslims off, and executed them."

Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.), chairman of the Armed Services Committee, asked, "Did the Dutch leaders tell you it was because there were gay soldiers there?"

"They included that as part of the problem," Sheehan said.

On Friday, Dutch Defense Minister Eimert van Middelkoop called Sheehan's comments "scandalous, and unworthy of a soldier." Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende said, "Toward Dutch troops, homosexual or heterosexual, it is way off the mark to talk like that about people and the work they do under very difficult circumstances."

He said he did not intend to bring up the matter with Obama, however, because Sheehan, a former NATO commander, is retired.
ad_icon

Sheehan said Gen. Henk van den Breemen, former Dutch defense chief of staff, had suggested to him that allowing gays to serve openly in the Netherlands' military had undermined its readiness.

But the Dutch Defense Ministry said that van den Breemen had never expressed such sentiments and that he considered them "absolute nonsense."

-- Los Angeles Times

 

[Political Junky]

Rachel Maddow Show

This link tells more about this matter. The ex general lied before congress to promote his own prejudice.

 

[rdean]

What's funny are the insults the Dutch and others made.

"The Republican Party is determined to prove to the world that irresponsibility is their slogan in government."

"Defense Minister Elmert Van Middelkoop said the American general’s comments were not only “damaging” but not worthy of a soldier."

"One is never surprised at the depths of immorality that Republicans in Congress will stoop in order to oppose an idea they wish to discredit. Imagine if a Dutch general made such a remark about American soldiers who suffered heavy casualties in a battle? General Sheehan is simply one sick creature."

"It is astonishing that a man of his stature can utter such complete nonsense," said Roger van de Wetering"

"Gen Sheehan said that after the end of the Cold War, European militaries changed and concluded "there was no longer a need for an active combat capability."
He said this process included "open homosexuality"

"The man is crazy," he told Dutch radio. "It sounds hard, but I can't put it any other way."

My absolute favorite from the Good General:
"The intelligence was that the North Vietnamese were going to attack that night," he said of a unit where half the soldiers were sleeping because they were on 50 per cent alert.

"About 1 (o'clock) in the morning, a fight broke out in a foxhole because the young marine was being molested by his squad leader. To the right of that foxhole, there was a machine-gun section that opened up and almost killed a combat patrol that was out in the front."

------------Let me get this, ahem, "straight", half the unit was asleep and they knew they were going to be attacked? A fight broke out over "gay sex"? Why, because everyone wanted in on it? You can't make this stuff up?
Anyone who has ever been in a Fox hole, filthy dirty, tired, hungry, scared, is NOT thinking about sex. I guarantee that.

I think it's important to note that the general has served America in a long and honorable career. He is from a different generation where it was assumed that gays were weak and unable to "control" their urges. When you are indoctrinated with this kind of "conservative propaganda" for years, it's difficult to see it as anything other than assumed truth. When people start laughing, it becomes confusing.

 

[Dante]

washingtonpost.com

Dutch reject retired U.S. general's claim that having gay soldiers led to Srebrenica massacre
Video
Retired general blames massacre on gays
A retired U.S. general's claim that gay Dutch soldiers were partly to blame for allowing Europe's worst massacre since World War II has sparked outrage in the Netherlands. (March 19)


...

the video of this right wing Christian doouchbagh is priceless.

Video - Breaking News Videos from CNN.com

 

[antagon]

broodnodig belachelijk dit dummerkop!

 

[rdean]

Why weren't the conservatives outraged when the Iraqis attacked their own Christians? Bush said he wouldn't protect the Christians because he didn't want to show "favoritism". Thousands murdered, nearly a million chased out of their homeland.

 

[Conspiracist]

Why weren't the conservatives outraged when the Iraqis attacked their own Christians? Bush said he wouldn't protect the Christians because he didn't want to show "favoritism". Thousands murdered, nearly a million chased out of their homeland.

Christians are attacked often in many Muslim countries.

Believe me, many were outraged but they were too busy protesting Harry Potter to be concerned with it.

In all seriousness, you go into Muslim turf protecting Christians and screams of the Crusades revisited would be louder than ever. Then you would have the PC crowd here in the USA to deal with.

 

[Dante]

Why weren't the conservatives outraged when the Iraqis attacked their own Christians? Bush said he wouldn't protect the Christians because he didn't want to show "favoritism". Thousands murdered, nearly a million chased out of their homeland.

Christians are attacked often in many Muslim countries.

Believe me, many were outraged but they were too busy protesting Harry Potter to be concerned with it.

In all seriousness, you go into Muslim turf protecting Christians and screams of the Crusades revisited would be louder than ever. Then you would have the PC crowd here in the USA to deal with.

they were too busy protesting Harry Potter

 

[rdean]

Why weren't the conservatives outraged when the Iraqis attacked their own Christians? Bush said he wouldn't protect the Christians because he didn't want to show "favoritism". Thousands murdered, nearly a million chased out of their homeland.

Christians are attacked often in many Muslim countries.

Believe me, many were outraged but they were too busy protesting Harry Potter to be concerned with it.

In all seriousness, you go into Muslim turf protecting Christians and screams of the Crusades revisited would be louder than ever. Then you would have the PC crowd here in the USA to deal with.

So Bush and the Republicans sacrificed the Iraqi Christians to avoid complaints? Guess so.