Get Over Gay Fear, US Allies Advise

[MJinZ]

Maybe U.S. allies should be left to their own devices and be forced to build their own armies.

Wouldn't be much of an ally.

 

[Patranus]

Wouldn't be much of an ally.

Allies work together not have one country build a military to protect all of the other countries.

 

[MJinZ]

Allies work together not have one country build a military to protect all of the other countries.

An Ally that dwarfs you in power and thus, has comparably dwarfing military might, won't be much an ally by de facto if it does nothing except sit by while you get slaughtered.

The other countries obviously have their own militaries, just nothing nearly as expansive.

 

[theeedude]

"Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT) is the nickname for the policy stated within Defense Directive 1304.26, issued by President Bill Clinton late in 1993." -Wikipedia

To replace an outright ban on gays in military in place at the time.

 

[Fear No Evil]

To replace an outright ban on gays in military in place at the time.

Ok, but YOU said:

"This policy is going to be overturned eventually, the sky will not fall, and supporters of it will be looked at as bigots and/or idiots."

So is Bill an idiot or a bigot?

 

[Shilohen]

That's meaningless drivel. For starters, they include stuff about foreign military experience, which means nothing as it relates to the US armed services. Then, they have a bunch of stuff basically saying "we don't have significant evidence to support the contention that having gays serving in the military is bad". Where's the data that shows that allowing gays to serve in the military is going to make it a more effective fighting force?

There most likely won't be any, except that it increases the potential recruit pool, but I don't see why it should make the military more efficient, just not less efficient should be enough.

 

[theeedude]

Ok, but YOU said:

"This policy is going to be overturned eventually, the sky will not fall, and supporters of it will be looked at as bigots and/or idiots."

So is Bill an idiot or a bigot?

If he was supporting DADT over allowing gays to serve openly, then both.

 

[Shilohen]

Ok, but YOU said:

"This policy is going to be overturned eventually, the sky will not fall, and supporters of it will be looked at as bigots and/or idiots."

So is Bill an idiot or a bigot?

Bill was stupid when he signed that law (and DOMA, but that's another issue), either because of hidden bigotry or effective lobbying.

 

[Daedalus685]

It is beyond baffling that this is an issue... Why on earth does anyone care at all? If soldier A is a good soldier then fine, if he is not, kick him out. How is this complicated? Seems the only issue is that drill sergeants will need to find some new insults if folks are openly gay and "queer-mo" doesn't have the same negativity associated with it...

Rule #1: No soldiers will actively inhibit another from doing their job.
Rule #2: We don't need a second rule because this is pretty fucking simple...

Though I suppose if there are enough low lives in the military that being gay is in itself a distraction then there may be a LOT more problems to deal with... That is what discipline is for though no? The young men up here certainly seem to possess this when on active duty and I doubt it is much different in the USA.

 

[werepossum]

Ok, but YOU said:

"This policy is going to be overturned eventually, the sky will not fall, and supporters of it will be looked at as bigots and/or idiots."

So is Bill an idiot or a bigot?

Dang, that's a hard one!

DADT actually makes a lot of sense. It released the military from the requirement of discharging a quietly gay service member if that member was not causing problems while allowing the military the option to remove a gay service member if that member was causing problems. Arguably that's the best of both worlds. It could be tweaked a bit to allow the military the option to not remove an openly gay person should it determine that is the best option, but again, this should be a military decision, not some feel-good thing forced on the military.

 

[theeedude]

By "causing problems" you mean being honest about who he is? Our military is subordinate to the civilian leadership which funds it. He who pays the piper calls the tune.

 

[woolfe9999]

This. The military was racially integrated before the country as a whole, and is perfectly capable of determining when openly gay service members can serve without a negative effect.

Also, this is a group of openly gay officers within our allies' armed forces; it is not the allies themselves, nor any other group without a dog in the fight.

The military did not integrate itself. It was integrated by order of Harry Truman, over its objections. In that case, the civilian leadership required them to be ahead of the social curve, and it worked out perfectly well, in spite of objections from the military which were eerily similar to the objections we are currently hearing.

- wolf

 

[ElFenix]

noes not teh ghey!

 

[ayabe]

Bill was stupid when he signed that law (and DOMA, but that's another issue), either because of hidden bigotry or effective lobbying.

Guys this is a long time ago attitudes have changed. This was before Will&Grace or anything "gay" being mainstream, it's just much, much more acceptable now.

 

[her209]

So is Bill an idiot or a bigot?

Bill was an idiot. Which one are you?

 

[zsdersw]

If our military is so fragile as to lose cohesion over a matter like this, then I'd say significant changes in the military are necessary. Fortunately, our military isn't so fragile, no matter how much supporters of DADT may claim to the contrary.

 

[werepossum]

The military did not integrate itself. It was integrated by order of Harry Truman, over its objections. In that case, the civilian leadership required them to be ahead of the social curve, and it worked out perfectly well, in spite of objections from the military which were eerily similar to the objections we are currently hearing.

- wolf

Partially true. Truman's order did require complete integration of blacks, but the military had partially integrated blacks before that. For instance my granduncle's MP unit in '44 & '45 had some black MPs, albeit in separate platoons. But blacks are not the only minority. Stimson successfully integrated Native Americans in the beginning of World War II. And in World War I the military successfully integrated Irish, Jews, and Italians, as well as Protestants and Catholics, at a time when France and Great Britain generally segregated such units where possible. (In fact Great Britain's regimental names often still reflect that segregation.) Even in World War II, France and Great Britain generally segregated racially and ethnically at the regimental if not divisional level, whereas the US typically segregated at the battalion level and lower. Nothing against Truman who was a great president and a man of unusual integrity, but his order accelerated a process already under way.

 

[Fear No Evil]

Bill was an idiot. Which one are you?

Actually. I'm for an all gay army. It would be SUPER! ()