Obama lawyers want the military to continue to bar openly gay people!

[Christians4LessGvt]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-11-10/obama-lawyers-back-military-don-t-ask-don-t-tell-gay-ban-at-high-court.html

[Plane]

Just not ready to live without an armed forces yet.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Being as dozens of countries have gays serving openly in the military, it must be possible to have gays in the military and still have a working military.

The Administration is trying to please the military (by stalling for time) and the Congress (who would prefer that the ban be eliminated by an actual law rather than an opinion that might be overturned).

You can't please everyone, ever, but they are trying to do the right thing in the right manner.

[Kramer]

That is really queer.

[Plane]

Being as dozens of countries have gays serving openly in the military, it must be possible to have gays in the military and still have a working military.

The Administration is trying to please the military (by stalling for time) and the Congress (who would prefer that the ban be eliminated by an actual law rather than an opinion that might be overturned).

You can't please everyone, ever, but they are trying to do the right thing in the right manner.

Do any of these Dozens need an armed force as large as ours?
Most of our allies are keeping smaller armed forces than they would need if they were not relying on our allience, and for the same reason we need a larger one.

If recruiting and retention drops 20% there will not be nearly enough willing Gay soldiers to make up the difference even if every GBT person the right age in the nation is recruited.

President Obama is looking down the barrell of this threat, of being the Commander in Cheif who presided over the collapse of The US armed forces.

[Xavier_Onassis]

I really doubt that there are any sizable numbers of people that would refuse to enlist because of a ban on gays. After all, gays are not banned NOW: they are just banned from telling anyone about it, which really means telling anti-gays about it. So people who have poorly functioning "gaydar" are thrown out, and others remain.

This might mean that the Marines might have some trouble. If they could let the Marines keep DADT, that could solve the entire problem.Not that I consider this likely. It is unclear whether Marines are even necessary: there is probably nothing they can do that a specialized Army group could not do, after all.

Originally, they were fighting sailors who traveled on boats for specialized coastal attacks. Now everyone gets airlifted, no matter what service, other than the Navy and Coast Guard.

Israel has no ban on gays, by the way.

It is pretty much inevitable that restrictions against DTDT and gays will be lifted, even if you guys do not like it. I am not gay, nor do I have any interest in the military, nor do I know anyone who does.

But it's going to happen, sooner or later. Just like marijuana will be legal, eventually. As those who are opposed dies off, they are replaced by more tolerant people. This is what happened with segregation, womens' rights and a host of other changes in society. Attitudes change, then the laws are changed.

As with segregation, the resistance increases most just before the opposition finally collapses in ruins. This happens in every society.

[Plane]

I think that a Twenty percent decrease in recruiting and retention is a conservative estimate , I wouldn't be surprised at worse.

If making Homosexuals recruitable opened the population availible by a full two percent, I would be surprised, I would bet on less.

Supposeing that you are right about 60% of the Armed Forces , that is not what I am talking about, loosing twenty percent is too much to sustain.

The Marines don't have any phobias, they induce them.

[Xavier_Onassis]

The Marines attract guys with a variety of sick and hostile attitudes. To be fair, they channel them in what is a useful way, or as useful as possible way. My Uncle Jay was the only Marine that I know who was not some sort of sick dickhead, and he was drafted into the Marines  WWI. I suppose non-dickhead Marines exist, but I have not met any. By dickhead, I mean egotistical bully. I am not saying that they are not useful in a time of war. Like Pit Bulls and Dobermans, they have their uses.

After they get out, they improve after 15 years or so. Ex-Marines eventually become tolerable.

Gays can enlist NOW and everyone knows it. I am pretty sure we could get by with 20% fewer wars, being as we have robots and all sorts of efficiency-creating equipment. But really, attitudes have changed greatly in the last few years.

[Plane]

Why shouldn't I think that 20% smaller Armed forces would result in 80% more war?

It is not like reduceing the number of firemen would reduce the incidence of housefires is it?

[Xavier_Onassis]

This country starts wars. Firefighters do not start fires.

Do you think that Afghanistan, Grenada, Panama, and Iraq were planning to invade the US?

[BT]

I think DADT will eventually go away.

I think the survey the DOD is conducting currently, needs to be completed and used as a road map for doing away with DADT.

[Xavier_Onassis]

I can go along with that. Planning for all contingencies is probably a wise path.

[Plane]

This country starts wars. Firefighters do not start fires.

Do you think that Afghanistan, Grenada, Panama, and Iraq were planning to invade the US?

This is clearly missing the point.

Soldiers do not start wars .

 

[Plane]

Do you think that Afghanistan, Grenada, Panama, and Iraq were planning to invade the US?

http://www.stripes.com/news/navy-posthumously-promotes-sailor-killed-in-air-hijacking-1.116053


Yes.


Ask me to remember for you all of the incidents in which a person was unjustly killed just for being an American?

Afganistan did indeed send an expedition to attack our homeland, in their estimation successfully.

Granada was a mess , our soldiers saved the Americans that were threatened and left Granada better off.

Etc. etc... it is easy enough to ignore the reasons , but the reasons wouldn't matter if we didn't have a strong military to answer challenges.

[Plane]

I think DADT will eventually go away.

I think the survey the DOD is conducting currently, needs to be completed and used as a road map for doing away with DADT.

Will the new policy damage the fighting ability of the armed forces?

If it does will anyone be willing to give up his career and say so?

We should learn from the fiasco that is the integration of Women into Naval combat units , now even into submarines. Up to a third of the women sent on a long cruse come back molested or harrassed or willingly pregnant, but are shipcaptains willing to say that there is a problem?

No they are not, it is worth their careers to stand against these directives , so they exibit a "can do" attitude at all levels of command and paper over the tragedy and reduction of capability.

If haveing Homosexuals integrated causes small problems we will never hear of it , if it causes large problems we will never hear of it, if it causes enourmous problems , something elese will be blamed.