DADT repealed

[Seafort]

Warfare and social experiments are not the same. Studying and implementing are also two totally different things... do you really agree with everything those other nations do despite not having immediate consequences?

The social experiment is done. It's over. It was over long before you and I were even a blip on the radar. We won't be studying how gays and lesbians affect the military (they won't), we'll be studying how those that aren't react to those that are, and how to address those issues.

Just because we would study someone else's battles/doctrine... even if what they did worked..... doesn't mean that we necessarily want to fight like that.... nor does it mean it would work in an entirely different culture.

No, it means we should use it as a blueprint to create our own. And looking at the how The RN, RCN, and the RAN did it and still do allows to look at militaries where it works within a culture that is in our cultural "family." We may be the breakaway child who left home in a huff, but Britain is still very much a cultural parent, and Canada and Australia are siblings.

Some militaries do just fine with an all male mandatory military service requirement - would that work here?

Depends on your definition of work. I think it's very much anti-libertarian, and contrary to American values (and the values of the other family members I just mentioned). Such a move is regressive, something we will never implement. Allowing gays and lesbians to serve without fear of being outed? That's progressive. Two different directions.

 

[mmx1]

How different are we from England or Israel?

And whose militaries are doing fine with all male compulsory service? The trend has been to the integration and greater reliance on volunteer forces - in all the great powers. Are you saying we're closer to the Saudis than the Brits?

You're flat out refusing to compare us to our closest allies "because it's different". How different?

 

[HueyCobra8151]

One things for sure, we will definitely see a lot more of these bumper stickers:

 

[phrogdriver]

Warfare and social experiments are not the same. Studying and implementing are also two totally different things... do you really agree with everything those other nations do despite not having immediate consequences?

Just because we would study someone else's battles/doctrine... even if what they did worked..... doesn't mean that we necessarily want to fight like that.... nor does it mean it would work in an entirely different culture.

Some militaries do just fine with an all male mandatory military service requirement - would that work here?

Great Britain is an entirely different culture? I seem to remember some vague connection between the US and Britain from history class. What was it? Hmmm...oh yeah, we used to be one of their colonies.

I think the countries I mentioned are conducting a little bit of warfare themselves. I flew Australian SAS around Afghanistan in December 2001. Both the Aussies and the Brits have been side-by-side with us throughout all our GWOT adventures and misadventures. While there may be issues between our militaries at times, one thing I've never heard is that what's wrong with their forces is too many queers. As far as the Israelis, while I'm not one who defers to them as the masters of warfare like some do, they are acutely aware of the fact that the IDF is what keeps their country alive. If they are willing to take a chance on this, it might be a strong sign.

What data would actually sway you? You can choose your opinion, but not your facts. Our own DOD's study says repeal will have little to no impact on effectiveness. Other countries have successfully allowed openly gay servicemembers to serve. On the other side of the argument is a bunch of hunches and hypothesis. If now isn't the time, how will you know when the time is?

 

[Swanee]

"I think the queers should stay out of the military! I wouldn't be comfortable around them, you know, with them wantin' me and all!"

Get over yourselves. And so what if a dude (or a chick if you are one) hits on your or asks you out on a date? "No thanks" is all you have to say. Gay people aren't the faeries and dykes that Hollywood portrays them to be. 40 years from now it won't even be an issue, just like serving with women or black people isn't an issue now. When it comes down to it and you're in a life or death situation you aren't going to be thinking," Wow, this guy is gay." You'll be thinking, "I'm glad I have a Marine, Sailor, Soldier, Airman next to me so we can get home."

 

[The Chief]

Sign of the Times.

If not the first, one of the first questions asked at Pres Obama's news conference today after signing the repeal of DADT, was, yes you guessed it. $64,000 prize to you.

The qeustion was paraphrased 'cause me memory is shaky: ".... how is it that our gallant young men and women that are gay can serve openly, fight and die for their country but they cannot marry whom they please nor can they enjoy the same benefits that "straights" enjoy ..... "

 

[ryan1234]

Great Britain is an entirely different culture? I seem to remember some vague connection between the US and Britain from history class. What was it? Hmmm...oh yeah, we used to be one of their colonies.

I think the countries I mentioned are conducting a little bit of warfare themselves. I flew Australian SAS around Afghanistan in December 2001. Both the Aussies and the Brits have been side-by-side with us throughout all our GWOT adventures and misadventures. While there may be issues between our militaries at times, one thing I've never heard is that what's wrong with their forces is too many queers. As far as the Israelis, while I'm not one who defers to them as the masters of warfare like some do, they are acutely aware of the fact that the IDF is what keeps their country alive. If they are willing to take a chance on this, it might be a strong sign.

What data would actually sway you? You can choose your opinion, but not your facts. Our own DOD's study says repeal will have little to no impact on effectiveness. Other countries have successfully allowed openly gay servicemembers to serve. On the other side of the argument is a bunch of hunches and hypothesis. If now isn't the time, how will you know when the time is?

Our societies are different, if some of the laws that are in place in Great Britain and Austrailia were to be put in place in the US (namely Gun Control and certain Tax issues) there would, without question, be a revolution. You have to see that the cultures of our 'closest allies' see things differently than we do as a whole... simply because any strategic and security goals are alligned at the moment does not turn them into us or visa versa.

I'm not taking away from, nor is there an implication that the gay military members in ours, or their armed forces are in any way shape or form inferior to straight people.

This comparison of their armed forces to ours is akin to comparing health care systems in other countries (i.e. if it works for them, it will surely work for us). We just can't think that way.

This is just a move amongst politicos for an advantage.

 

[Flying Toaster]

I personally believe.....

Never a good way to start a sentence. It's just a perfect layup for this to be posted.

Anyone else think they can drag the level of discourse lower than this?

 

[eas7888]

Anyone else think they can drag the level of discourse lower than this?

So, there I was, balls deep in some guy's ass. . .

There, go lower, I dare you.

 

[coolhandlukesd]

I see this thread has gone "Gay Chicken" ....lol

 

[SkywardET]

"I think the queers should stay out of the military! I wouldn't be comfortable around them, you know, with them wantin' me and all!"

Get over yourselves. And so what if a dude (or a chick if you are one) hits on your or asks you out on a date? "No thanks" is all you have to say. Gay people aren't the faeries and dykes that Hollywood portrays them to be. 40 years from now it won't even be an issue, just like serving with women or black people isn't an issue now. When it comes down to it and you're in a life or death situation you aren't going to be thinking," Wow, this guy is gay." You'll be thinking, "I'm glad I have a Marine, Sailor, Soldier, Airman next to me so we can get home."

Serving with women isn't an issue? Numerous clichéd statements? Is this a serious post?

Oh, sorry, this thread was supposed to be going downhill. Has anyone posted the Full Metal Jacket scene? Yeah? Well I've got nothing... sorry.

 

[eas7888]

Serving with women isn't an issue? Numerous clichéd statements? Is this a serious post?

Glad you said it first. I've had a number of issues with women while serving under fire. In all fairness, I've had issues with a number of men too.

 

[ryan1234]

Never a good way to start a sentence. It's just a perfect layup for this to be posted.

Anyone else think they can drag the level of discourse lower than this?

At first I was thinking that I would probably hit that... but as it kept going on... not so much

 

[ryan1234]

So, there I was, balls deep in some guy's ass. . .

There, go lower, I dare you.

Well if anything we can take away that the Ensign with a fetish for Tony Romo will be happy

 

[phrogdriver]

Our societies are different, if some of the laws that are in place in Great Britain and Austrailia were to be put in place in the US (namely Gun Control and certain Tax issues) there would, without question, be a revolution. You have to see that the cultures of our 'closest allies' see things differently than we do as a whole... simply because any strategic and security goals are alligned at the moment does not turn them into us or visa versa.

I'm not taking away from, nor is there an implication that the gay military members in ours, or their armed forces are in any way shape or form inferior to straight people.

This comparison of their armed forces to ours is akin to comparing health care systems in other countries (i.e. if it works for them, it will surely work for us). We just can't think that way.

This is just a move amongst politicos for an advantage.

A "revolution?" Seriously? Please.

So, basically, is there any conceivable threshold or evidence that would convince you? I mean it. Is there an example, survey, data, something that would convince you?

The US may be different from other places, but it's not unique (I'm sure the local country music station will be organizing a protest outside my home for saying that). I've worked with Brits and Aussies. They're good shit. If you think that those countries are somehow more enlightened about gay relations that the US, they aren't. Working-class blokes aren't any more excited about "poofs" than a redneck here is about "fags." But somehow, when they're in the military, they get over it and are professionals.

Apparently, according to those against repeal, our military is actually less professional than the Europeans' militaries. Who'd have thought that President Obama held the military in higher esteem than Senator McCain, for example?