0
skinnay

Republicans Boo Gay Soldier

Recommended Posts

Quote

Quote

First of all, troops don't need to be bangin' each other on the battle field. You obviously don't know all the extra drama that creates. While in Iraq, a male and a female in my security detachment were "bangin". The female starts talking to one of the guys they are supposed to be protecting, and now threats start going back and forth. The guys that are supposed to be protecting me are now threatening me in a jealous rage. Do you see anything wrong with this picture? It would be funny if it didn't really happen.



That's nice. Now do you have anything to say about DADT?



Yes, Yes I do.....

Under DADT homosexuals could serve, and if they roomed together, slept together, etc, and it became an issue, the chain of command could do something about it.

Just like with the above mentioned people, because men and women aren't supposed to be in each others barracks rooms, the chain of command could do something about it.

Now what do they do? You can't keep boys out of boys rooms or girls out of girls rooms.

I have nothing against gays in the military. I think they should be allowed to serve like everyone else. But there are still a couple of issues that need working out that no one thought about. DADT was a good bridge.
"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
Life, the Universe, and Everything

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

So how many years have you served in the military?



What does that have to with his opinion and observation?

Santorum said "any type of sexual activity has no place in the military"

....so a troop can't bang his spouse or bf/gf?

Pretty sad indeed that the soldier got booed and Santorum got claps.



Whoooooshhhhh.........

You have completely missed all the problems this is going to create.

First of all, troops don't need to be bangin' each other on the battle field. You obviously don't know all the extra drama that creates. While in Iraq, a male and a female in my security detachment were "bangin". The female starts talking to one of the guys they are supposed to be protecting, and now threats start going back and forth. The guys that are supposed to be protecting me are now threatening me in a jealous rage. Do you see anything wrong with this picture? It would be funny if it didn't really happen.

Second of all, now boyfriends can sleep together in the same room, girlfriends can sleep together in the same room, but boyfriend/girlfriend can't. Do you think that won't create any animosity? We might as well co-ed the barracks rooms/ showers at this point. But they shouldn't be sleeping together anyway. See above.

Good order and discipline are a must in the military. Without it, people get hurt or worse. If you don't understand that bare necessity, you don't understand the issue.



Wow, I wonder how the following countries have managed to deal with the issues he doesn't understand.

Countries allowing gays in the military:



Not going to go through the list individually, but let me paint things in 2 broad strokes:

1. Most European countries, the showers, barracks, etc, are already set up co-ed. Gays in there military pose no significant changes. Do you think we are as socially progressive as Sweden?

2. A lot of the other countries, well, who cares. Their military's are full of corruption and largely ineffective anyway. Good order and discipline are the least of their worries. You are seriously going to compare our military to Thailand's Military or the Philippine's Military?

You are comparing apples to oranges.
"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
Life, the Universe, and Everything

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


Just like with the above mentioned people, because men and women aren't supposed to be in each others barracks rooms, the chain of command could do something about it.

Now what do they do? You can't keep boys out of boys rooms or girls out of girls rooms.
I have nothing against gays in the military. I think they should be allowed to serve like everyone else. But there are still a couple of issues that need
working out that no one thought about. DADT was a good bridge.



I agree, but that bridge was not leading anywhere. The sexual attraction arguement has some merit, imo, but comparing the physiology of a woman to a gay man is hogwash - not that you did that.

Fight, fuck or reach for your gun - DOD was doing nothing to address these issues that you brought up. Repelling DADT is better than not doing anything at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>Expressing your disdain for homosexuality makes one disgraceful and un-American?

Expressing your disdain for straight soldiers certainly qualifies as un-American in the eyes of conservatives. One only read this forum for the bitter attacks they make on people who "don't support the troops." But perhaps there's an exception if said soldier is gay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


I agree, but that bridge was not leading anywhere. The sexual attraction arguement has some merit, imo, but comparing the physiology of a woman to a gay man is hogwash - not that you did that.



Yes, even Hetero men can be just as big of drama queens, just watch Jersey Shore, or any other reality TV show out there. When people in general start "hooking up", drama will always follow. Who you date doesn't matter, it's just a fact of life.

Quote


Fight, fuck or reach for your gun - DOD was doing nothing to address these issues that you brought up. Repelling DADT is better than not doing anything at all.



Yep, it's all fun and games until forcing policy down someone's throat gets you killed. Then it's hilarious....[:/]
"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
Life, the Universe, and Everything

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

gets you killed.



How?



Added drama as described in post #23. It's already out there, no need to add to it, or take away the tools to control it as described in post #27.
"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
Life, the Universe, and Everything

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

>Expressing your disdain for homosexuality makes one disgraceful and un-American?


Quote

Expressing your disdain for straight soldiers certainly qualifies as un-American in the eyes of conservatives.


Geez, Bill. If you are going to post a response to me as if I made a statement, at least respond to a statement that I made, eh? The quote was from someone else.


Quote

But perhaps there's an exception if said soldier is gay.


Yep. That's political correctness for you.
DON'T BASH MY (insert minority label of choice here) GROUP!
My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>Geez, Bill. If you are going to post a response to me as if I made a statement, at least
>respond to a statement that I made, eh?

Sorry. I quoted your post, and there were no quotes or anything around that part of your post, so I assumed that it was from you.

>DON'T BASH MY (insert minority label of choice here) GROUP!

How about just don't bash any soldiers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The "tools" are not used to remedy the drama, but to discharge gay service members for being gay. Discharge straight service members for the same drama and you might have a point, only problem is you can't kick somone out for the petty drama shit that you brought up. Double standard indeed.



You obviously haven't spent any time in the military. Straight service members have been kicked out for this.
"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
Life, the Universe, and Everything

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote



You obviously haven't spent any time in the military. Straight service members have been kicked out for this.



I've never known a straight service member get kicked out for a single offense of being in the room of someone of the opposite sex - even if they're doin' it. However, I have seen demotions, NJPs, restriction, office hours, adverse fitreps (for E5's and above) and even people kicked out of a country for dickin' around. But never an OTH, DH, or GHC for a single offense - unless the the service member is gay, then its an unfavorable DD214 for the same single offense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Santorum said "any type of sexual activity has no place in the military"

....so a troop can't bang his spouse or bf/gf?



No, it means it should not be an issue that the Govt concerns itself with.


Ya...could you imagine if all the women were skipping out of service because they got pregnant or all the homosexuals were skipping out because of gay bowel syndrome?

(...c'mon people, laugh...it's an outdated term anyway...:|)
Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

How about just don't bash any soldiers?



Now there's a novel idea.
Nah...it'll never work.
Too many people blame the soldier instead of the politicos that put him out there.
My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

homosexuals were skipping out because of gay bowel syndrome?


Wouldn't that fall under "pre-existing condition" clauses?
:D:D

Oh wait....not necessarily.
The military is well known for screwing people in the ass for all manner of infractions, both large and small.
My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote



You obviously haven't spent any time in the military. Straight service members have been kicked out for this.



I've never known a straight service member get kicked out for a single offense of being in the room of someone of the opposite sex - even if they're doin' it. However, I have seen demotions, NJPs, restriction, office hours, adverse fitreps (for E5's and above) and even people kicked out of a country for dickin' around. But never an OTH, DH, or GHC for a single offense - unless the the service member is gay, then its an unfavorable DD214 for the same single offense.


I have seen several people kicked out with OTH's and General discharges (depending on if Adultery or other infractions were involved, along with service member history). It sounds like you may have worked for the Army. They have different standards....B|
"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
Life, the Universe, and Everything

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I have seen several people kicked out with OTH's and General discharges (depending on if Adultery or other infractions were involved, along with service member history).



Exactly - depending on adultery and other infractions. But no OTH's and GC's for grab-ass barracks BS, like it would be in the case of a gay dude.

Quote

It sounds like you may have worked for the Army. They have different standards....B|



Eight years in the Marines. And yes, the Army does have a different set of standards:P [/:P]

I agree with much of what you've said about tension in the mix, not being able to enforce barracks standards with same sex rooming (which is "not" about sex (gender), but about sex (the act) which happens to mainly be between a guy and a girl, etc... These are all valid points. But to do nothing about it and not address the issue and denying people a chance to openly serve their country does not make sense.

The military teaches character, loyalty, honor, and all the jazz. But at the same time they have/had a policy in place that requires people to actively hide who they are - someone's sexual preference is much of who they are.

If "being gay" becomes an issue for someone one and affects their job performance either in the rear or on the battlefield, then get them for not working to standard or some crap (gay or straight). Punish them for the offenses, not for being gay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


Good order and discipline are a must in the military. Without it, people get hurt or worse. If you don't understand that bare necessity, you don't understand the issue.



Wow, I wonder how the following countries have managed to deal with the issues he doesn't understand.

Countries allowing gays in the military:



Not going to go through the list individually, but let me paint things in 2 broad strokes:

1. Most European countries, the showers, barracks, etc, are already set up co-ed. Gays in there military pose no significant changes. Do you think we are as socially progressive as Sweden?

2. A lot of the other countries, well, who cares. Their military's are full of corruption and largely ineffective anyway. Good order and discipline are the least of their worries. You are seriously going to compare our military to Thailand's Military or the Philippine's Military?

You are comparing apples to oranges.



I certainly WOULD compare the German, UK, Australian and Russian militaries with the US's in culture and efficiency. If they can do it with their budgets, so can we with ours. We outspend all of them combined; refitting barracks shouldn't be a problem for us if we get our priorities right. Certainly cheaper than B1 bombers that never flew a mission, or F22s that poison their pilots.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


I certainly WOULD compare the German, UK, Australian and Russian militaries with the US's in culture and efficiency. If they can do it with their budgets, so can we with ours. We outspend all of them combined; refitting barracks shouldn't be a problem for us if we get our priorities right. Certainly cheaper than B1 bombers that never flew a mission, or F22s that poison their pilots.



So why did the UN whine to us to lead the coalition for the initial strikes in to Libya? Having worked with said military's on numerous occasions in Afghanistan and Iraq, I would have to say you are wrong.

While they may be more efficient, the US is more specialized and in order to do this, our living conditions, work ethics, and the way we figure man power to handle a problem are way different. The end result is way different. All the the above military's that you mentioned envy ours, especially when it comes to good order and discipline.

Still apples to oranges....
"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
Life, the Universe, and Everything

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK question...does the military still use saltpeter? I know they used it on our unit when I was out in the field in Alamagordo, New Mexico for 45 days...and the day I come back...meet a cute girl, and now I have a daughter. Just wondering if they still employ those kind of tactics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0