Obama to call for 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' repeal, adviser says

[bodecea]

Can't the CinC just end the policy himself?

No, it takes an act of Congress to change the UCMJ.

Show me where "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is in the UCMJ.

 

[bodecea]

Wow, he's really putting himself out on a limb in an attempt to keep at least one of his promises.

I think this one will pretty much ensure he doesn't have a second term.

I agree. Personally, I'm not opposed to homosexuals serving openly. I am in a minority in that opinion though. That said, I do have a problem wth politicans using the Military as a vehicle for social change. The GOP won't even have to fling this back at him. If he mentions it tonight, the media will fling it for them.

You realize you are repeating the exact same objections as were heard in the late 1940s when Truman integrated the military.

 

[bodecea]

No one has nor will anyone ever convince me that gays serving openly in the US Army is a good thing.

I don't see it and will always be against it.

And no I do not hate gays, I have a gay step son even. And he knows how I feel about gays in the military and actually agrees with me.

Read "Conduct Unbecoming".

 

[uscitizen]

1948: "I don't have a problem with those negros, I have a problem with them serving along side the white man. Can you even see the difference?"

You're not getting Crimson's point, and don't yell, I'm not calling you a racist. I'm giving you an example of what Crimson was talking about. The same things you said now are what were said over 60 years ago. And Crimson was right, the unit got it and it will get over this. They're mature people.

And I know what would have happened to any gay who would have been found in my Unit. I doubt seriously that I could have protected him. And I don't really believe that our NCO's should have this as another problem to worry about. I'm against it and always will be. It is not good for the Unit and not good for moral. Remember I've been there you haven't. But hey I've been retired 16 years, maybe troops have changed that much, but i doubt it.

The bolded part doesn't really fly around here.

Your argument is the same as 1948.

If they have no more self control than that, then I am not sure they deserve to be in the American military.
Very unprofessional.

Everyone hands of as far a sex goes with any sex of partener/troop and all will work out fine.
If some can't hold themselves to the current military standards then they do not deserve to nor should they be in the military.
That was why NO GAYS before "do not ask do not tell". So I thinkn you can see where this is going. Change is the only constant in the unniverse.

 

[CrimsonWhite]

Can't the CinC just end the policy himself?

No, it takes an act of Congress to change the UCMJ.

Show me where "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is in the UCMJ.

Article 125 makes sodomy a crime in the military. It would have to be changed in order for gays to openly serve.

10 U.S.C. § 654 is the federal law that mandates the ban on gays openly serving in the military due to a creation of an "unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability."

Both take acts of Congress with the signature of the President to repeal.

 

[CrimsonWhite]

I think this one will pretty much ensure he doesn't have a second term.

I agree. Personally, I'm not opposed to homosexuals serving openly. I am in a minority in that opinion though. That said, I do have a problem wth politicans using the Military as a vehicle for social change. The GOP won't even have to fling this back at him. If he mentions it tonight, the media will fling it for them.

You realize you are repeating the exact same objections as were heard in the late 1940s when Truman integrated the military.

Yeah, keep reading the thread.

My problem is the irresponsibility of adding something to military's plate.

 

[bodecea]

I agree. Personally, I'm not opposed to homosexuals serving openly. I am in a minority in that opinion though. That said, I do have a problem wth politicans using the Military as a vehicle for social change. The GOP won't even have to fling this back at him. If he mentions it tonight, the media will fling it for them.

You realize you are repeating the exact same objections as were heard in the late 1940s when Truman integrated the military.

Yeah, keep reading the thread.

My problem is the irresponsibility of adding something to military's plate.

Except...and here's the thing...nothing is being added. Gays have been serving since the very beginning. Now think of all the time saved that used to be wasted rooting us out and discharging us. Now everyone can be normal and themselves.

 

[bodecea]

No, it takes an act of Congress to change the UCMJ.

Show me where "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is in the UCMJ.

Article 125 makes sodomy a crime in the military. It would have to be changed in order for gays to openly serve.

Are you serious? How many straight people in the military commit sodomy? Are they being pursued? Are they?

10 U.S.C. § 654 is the federal law that mandates the ban on gays openly serving in the military due to a creation of an "unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability."

Both take acts of Congress with the signature of the President to repeal.

10 U.S.C. is not the UCMJ....

Again, I applaud the President for FINALLY getting rid of a travesty and a joke of a policy.

 

[uscitizen]

No, it takes an act of Congress to change the UCMJ.

Show me where "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is in the UCMJ.

Article 125 makes sodomy a crime in the military. It would have to be changed in order for gays to openly serve.

10 U.S.C. § 654 is the federal law that mandates the ban on gays openly serving in the military due to a creation of an "unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability."

Both take acts of Congress with the signature of the President to repeal.

As long as they do no sodomy with fellow servicepeople Where is the problem?

makes sodomy a crime IN the military

I don't think that co-ed sex is actually legal in the military, esp while on duty I would think.

 

[CrimsonWhite]

You realize you are repeating the exact same objections as were heard in the late 1940s when Truman integrated the military.

Yeah, keep reading the thread.

My problem is the irresponsibility of adding something to military's plate.

Except...and here's the thing...nothing is being added. Gays have been serving since the very beginning. Now think of all the time saved that used to be wasted rooting us out and discharging us. Now everyone can be normal and themselves.

Any gay in the military wouldn't get that opportunity for at least a couple of generations. Until then, unit cohesion and esprit de corps get screwed up in a time that the military simple cannot afford it. Two or three years down the road, when we have pulled out of Iraq and Afghan, then I say go ahead. Take the plunge. Until then it is irresponsible to make a culture change of that magnitude in the military while we are fighting a two front war.

 

[bodecea]

Show me where "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is in the UCMJ.

Article 125 makes sodomy a crime in the military. It would have to be changed in order for gays to openly serve.

10 U.S.C. § 654 is the federal law that mandates the ban on gays openly serving in the military due to a creation of an "unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability."

Both take acts of Congress with the signature of the President to repeal.

As long as they do no sodomy with fellow servicepeople Where is the problem?

makes sodomy a crime IN the military

Unless it is also accompanied by the charge of rape, I have never seen anyone straight charged with sodomy in the U.S. Military. I wonder why that is.

 

[007]

Actually we don't use the word queer. My step son doesn't appreciate it much. So we stick to gay. You see I don't have a problem with gays, I have a problem with gays serving openly in the military. Can you even see the difference?

1948: "I don't have a problem with those negros, I have a problem with them serving along side the white man. Can you even see the difference?"

You're not getting Crimson's point, and don't yell, I'm not calling you a racist. I'm giving you an example of what Crimson was talking about. The same things you said now are what were said over 60 years ago. And Crimson was right, the unit got it and it will get over this. They're mature people.

And I know what would have happened to any gay who would have been found in my Unit. I doubt seriously that I could have protected him. And I don't really believe that our NCO's should have this as another problem to worry about. I'm against it and always will be. It is not good for the Unit and not good for moral. Remember I've been there you haven't. But hey I've been retired 16 years, maybe troops have changed that much, but i doubt it.

And I went through basic in November of 1979. We had this little black dude that was about as gueer as queer can get. I don't know how he got in but he got in. But everyone in our flight knew he was a fag so we made him shower by himself, after everyone else had taken theirs. No one wanted the little fag boy to be in the shower with them and have him scoping out their meat or eye fucking their ass. Had that happened I'm afraid the little homo would have gotten his ass kicked and thrown out a second story window. In fact I think what saved him from getting his ass kicked and thrown out the second story window was the fact that he was a seamstress... or seam-boy, and he sewed many people's hems on their fatigues, so they let him slide.

But basic training now is a kiddie camp. If a drill sergeant gets in someone's face, they can hold up a "stress" card to make them stop, so basic has been pussied down to the point of pathetic. Add to that the liberal indoctrination today's youth gets in schools having acceptance to homosexuality beaten into their heads, and fags in the military probably won't be a problem . Course then again maybe it would be. Hard to tell. I do know if they're going to try it, they're going to have to separate them somehow in basic. But if they put all homos in one barracks, then they may as well put straight male and female recruits in together as well, otherwise they could protest they're being discriminated against, and they would be.

 

[uscitizen]

Yeah, keep reading the thread.

My problem is the irresponsibility of adding something to military's plate.

Except...and here's the thing...nothing is being added. Gays have been serving since the very beginning. Now think of all the time saved that used to be wasted rooting us out and discharging us. Now everyone can be normal and themselves.

Any gay in the military wouldn't get that opportunity for at least a couple of generations. Until then, unit cohesion and esprit de corps get screwed up in a time that the military simple cannot afford it. Two or three years down the road, when we have pulled out of Iraq and Afghan, then I say go ahead. Take the plunge. Until then it is irresponsible to make a culture change of that magnitude in the military while we are fighting a two front war.

hmm, seems like we used to be tougher than that....

 

[uscitizen]

Article 125 makes sodomy a crime in the military. It would have to be changed in order for gays to openly serve.

10 U.S.C. § 654 is the federal law that mandates the ban on gays openly serving in the military due to a creation of an "unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability."

Both take acts of Congress with the signature of the President to repeal.

As long as they do no sodomy with fellow servicepeople Where is the problem?

makes sodomy a crime IN the military

Unless it is also accompanied by the charge of rape, I have never seen anyone straight charged with sodomy in the U.S. Military. I wonder why that is.

Not even in the NAVY

 

[CrimsonWhite]

Show me where "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is in the UCMJ.

Article 125 makes sodomy a crime in the military. It would have to be changed in order for gays to openly serve.

Are you serious? How many straight people in the military commit sodomy? Are they being pursued? Are they?

10 U.S.C. § 654 is the federal law that mandates the ban on gays openly serving in the military due to a creation of an "unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability."

Both take acts of Congress with the signature of the President to repeal.

10 U.S.C. is not the UCMJ....

Again, I applaud the President for FINALLY getting rid of a travesty and a joke of a policy.

No shit. I promise that I know the difference. An openly gay serviceman openly admits the act of sodomy by being openly gay. "Don't ask don't tell" can be repealed, but the act of sodomy would exclude gays from the military. Both should be repealed. Just not today.

 

[Article 15]

1948: "I don't have a problem with those negros, I have a problem with them serving along side the white man. Can you even see the difference?"

You're not getting Crimson's point, and don't yell, I'm not calling you a racist. I'm giving you an example of what Crimson was talking about. The same things you said now are what were said over 60 years ago. And Crimson was right, the unit got it and it will get over this. They're mature people.

And I know what would have happened to any gay who would have been found in my Unit. I doubt seriously that I could have protected him. And I don't really believe that our NCO's should have this as another problem to worry about. I'm against it and always will be. It is not good for the Unit and not good for moral. Remember I've been there you haven't. But hey I've been retired 16 years, maybe troops have changed that much, but i doubt it.

And I went through basic in November of 1979. We had this little black dude that was about as gueer as queer can get. I don't know how he got in but he got in. But everyone in our flight knew he was a fag so we made him shower by himself, after everyone else had taken theirs. No one wanted the little fag boy to be in the shower with them and have him scoping out their meat or eye fucking their ass. Had that happened I'm afraid the little homo would have gotten his ass kicked and thrown out a second story window. In fact I think what saved him from getting his ass kicked and thrown out the second story window was the fact that he was a seamstress... or seam-boy, and he sewed many people's hems on their fatigues, so they let him slide.

But basic training now is a kiddie camp. If a drill sergeant gets in someone's face, they can hold up a "stress" card to make them stop, so basic has been pussied down to the point of pathetic. Add to that the liberal indoctrination today's youth gets in schools having acceptance to homosexuality beaten into their heads, and fags in the military probably won't be a problem today. Course maybe it would be. Hard to tell. I do know if they're going to try it, they're going to have separate them somehow. But if they put all homos in one barracks, then they may as well put male and female recruits in together as well, otherwise they could protest they're being discriminated against, and they would be.

Thankfully, dinosaurs like you are retiring every year.

 

[Modbert]

Thankfully, dinosaurs like you are retiring every year.

I'd say so.

 

[007]

And I know what would have happened to any gay who would have been found in my Unit. I doubt seriously that I could have protected him. And I don't really believe that our NCO's should have this as another problem to worry about. I'm against it and always will be. It is not good for the Unit and not good for moral. Remember I've been there you haven't. But hey I've been retired 16 years, maybe troops have changed that much, but i doubt it.

And I went through basic in November of 1979. We had this little black dude that was about as gueer as queer can get. I don't know how he got in but he got in. But everyone in our flight knew he was a fag so we made him shower by himself, after everyone else had taken theirs. No one wanted the little fag boy to be in the shower with them and have him scoping out their meat or eye fucking their ass. Had that happened I'm afraid the little homo would have gotten his ass kicked and thrown out a second story window. In fact I think what saved him from getting his ass kicked and thrown out the second story window was the fact that he was a seamstress... or seam-boy, and he sewed many people's hems on their fatigues, so they let him slide.

But basic training now is a kiddie camp. If a drill sergeant gets in someone's face, they can hold up a "stress" card to make them stop, so basic has been pussied down to the point of pathetic. Add to that the liberal indoctrination today's youth gets in schools having acceptance to homosexuality beaten into their heads, and fags in the military probably won't be a problem today. Course maybe it would be. Hard to tell. I do know if they're going to try it, they're going to have separate them somehow. But if they put all homos in one barracks, then they may as well put male and female recruits in together as well, otherwise they could protest they're being discriminated against, and they would be.

Thankfully, dinosaurs like you are retiring every year.

And being replaced with pussies like you? Is that a good thing?

 

[CrimsonWhite]

Article 125 makes sodomy a crime in the military. It would have to be changed in order for gays to openly serve.

10 U.S.C. § 654 is the federal law that mandates the ban on gays openly serving in the military due to a creation of an "unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability."

Both take acts of Congress with the signature of the President to repeal.

As long as they do no sodomy with fellow servicepeople Where is the problem?

makes sodomy a crime IN the military

Unless it is also accompanied by the charge of rape, I have never seen anyone straight charged with sodomy in the U.S. Military. I wonder why that is.

It usually isn't, but the military has always argued that because sodomy is a criminal act under 125, allowing gays to serve would amount to harboring criminals.

 

[Article 15]

And I went through basic in November of 1979. We had this little black dude that was about as gueer as queer can get. I don't know how he got in but he got in. But everyone in our flight knew he was a fag so we made him shower by himself, after everyone else had taken theirs. No one wanted the little fag boy to be in the shower with them and have him scoping out their meat or eye fucking their ass. Had that happened I'm afraid the little homo would have gotten his ass kicked and thrown out a second story window. In fact I think what saved him from getting his ass kicked and thrown out the second story window was the fact that he was a seamstress... or seam-boy, and he sewed many people's hems on their fatigues, so they let him slide.

But basic training now is a kiddie camp. If a drill sergeant gets in someone's face, they can hold up a "stress" card to make them stop, so basic has been pussied down to the point of pathetic. Add to that the liberal indoctrination today's youth gets in schools having acceptance to homosexuality beaten into their heads, and fags in the military probably won't be a problem today. Course maybe it would be. Hard to tell. I do know if they're going to try it, they're going to have separate them somehow. But if they put all homos in one barracks, then they may as well put male and female recruits in together as well, otherwise they could protest they're being discriminated against, and they would be.

Thankfully, dinosaurs like you are retiring every year.

And being replaced with pussies like you.

You were in the Air Force ... don't try to fool ppl into thinking you are some kind of tough guy.