Don't Ask Don't Tell

[Brian Degulis]

That's come up again BO wants to allow gays to serve openly in the military. What do you guys think?


Brian

 

[Genesis]

I think it's a bad idea.

But I think it's a bad idea for the same reason I think it's a bad idea to have women serving in combat roles in the military next to men in the same unit.

It has exactly nothing to do with whether or not gays should be serving per-se.

It has everything to do with the risk of two people who are intimate with each other winding up in a combat situation together, and one or both of those people's judgment being trashed due to their feelings.

No way. This is a function of combat readiness and compromise of people on the battlefield due to their potential romantic involvement with each other. It's stupid and the product of allowing political correctness to overrun common sense.

Call me old-fashioned but I don't think you can fix that problem once the door is open. Yes, I know there are already anti-fraternization policies in the military but you stick people who want to shag each other close enough together for long enough and some of them are going to do it, rules or no rules.

 

[StratPlan61]

Its a conundrum curious to me. Most of you know I served 36+ years in uniform. Sexual preference should not be a 'wear on your sleeve' identifier anymore than religion, blood type or political preference. Are gays serving in the military, sure. But why create a specticle of it? Should we ask all certain 'religions groups' soldiers to identify themselves? And to what end? How about requiring every military person to identify their political preference? Again, to what end? The present policy is working, let it be.

Regarding male/female teams in a combat environment - we already have it in numerous military positions. Again, this isn't a problem. Remember, today's battlefield is atypical, everywhere IS the front lines. Everyone is combat vulnerable, all of the time. All branches of the military have adequate personal behavior disciplines - and these work fine for 99.99% of military personnel. Will there always be some exception created by a knucklehead - sure, like any group of people working together. The combat environment creates no special exceptions - personal discipline and behavior remain the root cause factors. Male soldiers perform better when female soldiers are present in the team - no matter the location on the battlefield. Do soldiers make poor decisions based on personal emotional influences? Damn seldom in my experience. While commanding a 500+ soldier rocket artillery battalion, one of sons was one of my 31 Lieutenants - it doesn't influence decisions - training and discipline preclude it. Had I been commanding my old battalion the day MAJ Scott Meyers was blown up in Sadr City - my decisions would have been the same as any other day - 500 soldiers depend upon it. Female soldiers deliver specific skills better than male soldiers - just as in some cases male soldiers deliver specific skills better - the combination team is always best.

Some politicians want credit for 'doing something' by changing things which are not broken - don't let 'em screw up the best military team we have ever had - no reason for it.

 

[Boatsb]

I think they should change the policy to "Don't care". Any American wanting to serve should be allowed. If someone is homophobic or afraid of women they may not be our best soldier. Get rid of them not the ones they fear.

The Israeli army can have everyone serving together so why can't we? because we have too much political BS and not enough common sense. If we were in the same mindset as the Israelis ( live or die by your military defenses) I bet we would not be so closed minded.

 

[jlightonjr]

I am for removing the 'ban' on gays in the military. Sexual orientation, in my opinion, should not be a issue for doing your job, in this case, fighting for the country you love.

This is not about “asking” military members their orientation, rather this issue pertains to the operational “rule” that commanders must currently follow which mandates if the military finds out a particular member is gay, the rules as they stand, mandate that member must be discharged, regardless of their performance and value.

I am Lutheran, can you imagine how backwards it would look if there was a DADT policy on Lutherans? Imagine for a second…

“They (The Lutherans) don’t kneel as much during services and they don’t focus much on the Virgin Mary like the Catholics so let’s kick them out if we should find out during the course of their service that they have these Lutheran behaviors…” Doesn’t make much sense to me in terms of being able, capable, and dedicated to serve the USA.

If we do not change this policy, our Country will continue to lose highly qualified women and men at a time where we need to keep great, qualified, and dedicated members within the force.

My 2 cents…

 

[Brian Degulis]

Our military is called upon to use deadly force to defend our way of life and our right to live it. As such they should not be exempted from adhering to one of the most basic tenants of our way of life. That is that we don't punish or restrict a persons rights based on what they might be thinking. No ones advocating that gay behavior should be acceptable in the military. So the only reason there is to throw someone out who's following the rules is fear of what they might do based on what they might be thinking about. That's the thought police and should not be allowed to continue.

Brian