Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Rush

[fertile1]

DADT RIP: Better Late (Way Late) Than Never

The era (I think 17 years qualifies as such) of DADT is finally over, law-of-the-land-wise. In the end, the process was orderly and rational. Lawmakers duly solicited the views of military leaders and, receiving somewhat contradictory input, decided according to their own lights that were, for a change, on the side of the angels.

It's somewhat ironic that Bill Clinton, who is currently credited for lending needed support for Obama's reneging on his campaign promise to end tax breaks for the wealthy, is himself responsible for reneging on his own much earlier campaign promise to end discrimination in the armed forces—a reneging that created the monstrous DADT policy in the first place. But as the elder Clinton is currently the darling of the media, we don't talk a lot about that.

The mystery is, of course, what took the Obama administration and a Congress dominated by the Democrat Party so bloody long to do the right thing. Could it be that military policies don't have quite the same resonance in the socialist agenda as health care?

I don't know how long it took to eliminate racial segregation in the military. It's exactly, but exactly, the same issue, despite the protestations of some black activists. At last, loyal warriors can serve their country without being stigmatized or segregated based only on the color of their skin or what gender turns them on.

[WeaponOfMassInstruction]

This is one of those areas in which my latent libertarianism takes control of my thought processes.

I'm really not qualified to express and opinion on DADT, as I never served. I'll leave it to those who did to make their opinions known. If they do not think it is all that big a deal, then I'm fine with gays serving openly. My primary concern is the quality of the defense of the United States; political correctness matters not a whit.

Fertile, I do agree that the process- wonder of wonders- worked exactly as it should. Hearing were held, the topic thoroughly debated and the decision made by the legislature, not the courts. I can quibble about the timing- surely there are more important issues to be dealth with than DADT right now- but I take pride in knowing that the system worked.

Segregation in the military was a funny thing. There were integrated units as far back as the Revolution, though the troops, regardless of race, had white officers. In the Civil War, troops were strictly segregated and led by white officers, though there were occasions in which, because white officers were killed or wounded, black noncoms led black troops (such as at the Battle of the Crater outside Petersburg, VA.). Segregation and marginalization (and by that I mean blacks were relegated to non-combat menial roles) seems to have taken root around the turn of the 20th century. Blacks were relegated to roles such as drivers, steveadores, cooks and mess attendants and the like from the late 1890s to roughly 1945. There were instances of black troops not only serving under fire but doing so with great bravery (Doris Miller at Pearl Harbor for instance), but it was generally still thought that blacks would not be able to endure the same burdens under fire as white troops. President Truman was really the first President since Lincoln to consider changing the allowable role for black troops in the military. Many of the exact same objections were raised when he was considering integration as were brought up in the debate over first women in combat roles and then DADT. I think the the death of DADT was predictable based on the decisions made regarding integration and women serving.

[flyphish56]

Segregation and marginalization (and by that I mean blacks were relegated to non-combat menial roles) seems to have taken root around the turn of the 20th century

I have heard it said a number of times that the re-segregation of our military was brought about under Woodrow Wilson. I've not done any extensive research on the man other than to acertain that he was pretty much the father of the progressive movement in American politics, but it seems that he was personally very much a racist.(I reckon that won't set well with our liberal posters. The same seems to be true of Margarette Sanger of Planned Parenthood fame.)

I'm really not qualified to express and opinion on DADT, as I never served. I'll leave it to those who did to make their opinions known.

I thank you for your approach to this Weapon. Most don't seem to think it is of much import to base thier opinion on personal experience. I did serve (4 years in the Navy) and must say that openly gay/lesbian people in the service makes me very uncomfortable.
Totally apart from my conservative worldview (which is basically Christian) I am troubled by it as I was when women were assigned to shipboard duty.
In attempting to view both from as non-judgemental a perspective as I am able as a mere human being I see both as injecting just one more eliment of tension into an already tension saturated environment.
The bulk of our military personell are between 18 and 24 years of age. Right at the peak of thier hormonal developement. Combining this with communal toilet and shower facilities, the squad bay type berthing spaces found about ship and the overall confinement that is shipboard life seems a garanteed recipe for trouble.
My personal aversion to homosexuality aside, I just don't understand the need to increase the pressure in an already high pressure job.
I will agree without reservation that being able to do the job is the most important factor, and if a gay/lesbian service member can fire the weapon better than a straight one by all means let them. But it seems to me that the militancy of todays GLBTG movement is much more an "in your face" "we'll show you" movement than it is a "live and let live" one.

I reckon there are a few (perhaps quite a few) who will call me a bigot or hatemonger or worse, and that's okay. "Been called worse by better" as the saying goes. But the truth is that at this juncture in our nation's history it seems to me we have much more important issues before us and much greater dangers to the security of the nation than allowing a small minority of folks to disrupt the very institutions that have bought our freedoms (in blood) for the simple expedient of political correctness.
I've never gone out of my way to offend gays/lesbians, but it seems they never tire of going out of thier way to offend the straight world.

[btorocco]

Weapon and Flyphish, I appreciate both your honest remarks about a sensitive topic. As far as my own two cents, it is my contention that this is not a good idea. I share Fly's discomfort with the prospect of serving with open gays. I also happen to think that right now we have the most intelligent, highly trained and well-motivated fighting force in our history, so why mess with it now? This is not to say that gays cannot serve with distinction, I'm sure some already have, but I just don't like the idea of tossing our armed forces a curve ball, so to speak. I think morale may suffer, but then I thought a volunteer army would never work, I was spectacularly wrong about that (fortunately!), and I hope I'm wrong about this. My thinking, however, is based upon the fact that (and this is something no one wants to talk about) the Catholic Church some years ago realized they had a severe priest shortage and decided to look the other way when gays were entering the priesthood. We have all seen the result and although the LSM will NEVER report or admit this, these pedophile priests never seem to go after girls. Let's call a spade a spade here, shall we? These are not just pederasts, they are gay pederasts. Whether the military will have a problem here remains to be seen but I still say it ain't broke so don't fix it. BTW, Flyphish, Margaret Sanger wasn't merely a racist, she was a GENOCIDAL racist.

[honestavner]

I don't agree with them repealing it. I was in the army, and i served with men and women.. And everyone is foolen around with each other, and it causes so much drama... People were always getting in trouble for certain behaviors. And now that men can be open with there homosexualty its just gona cause more none sence....

[jaybear_us]

Even though I am straight and have been happily married for over 20 years, I find that judging a person, any person, based on one single aspect of who he or she is, is utterly absurd.

I served in the U.S. Army for three years and did nineteen months in vietnam during the worst of the fighting. During a lull in the Tet Offensive, another guy indicated to me that he would like to start a relationship with me. Yes, he was gay and most of the guys in our unit knew it. I told him that I wasn't gay and wasn't interested in that kind of contact. He never mentioned it again, neither did I, and we never had any problem with him, his service, his dedication to the mission or his trust.

I'm sure that many of the people who are against the repeal of DODT would have been the same people against the integration of blacks and women into the military, and at that time probably came up with perfectly good reasons why blacks and women would be detrimental to the military also.

I will acknowledge that I may be different than most people. Even at an early age, like during high school, I never did get the animosity against someone simply because he/she was gay. Kinda like religion in that a person's sexual preference, unless it impinges on my rights is that person's own business. I can't see where it affects the really important things which make up a person't character.

[fertile1]

Thanks, JB, for your eloquent, and oh, so human comment. The views of those, like you, who have actually served are especially relevant, and it's somewhat distressing to see that those views are divided. I harbor the yuletide hope that somehow these conflicting views can be reconciled in the interest of promoting the best possible future for our beloved country.

[honestavner]

Jaybear.. you don't understand the modern military...... Becasue men and women serve together, there is so much foolen around going on.... Every mouth people were getting busted for having sex with each other... Its just what happens when you bring men and women together.... and now that gays can be open about their life style its just gona cause more Drama.... I don't think gays should be in the military for the same reason i think women shouldn't serve in the military... THey are a distraction.... I did two tours of Combat in Iraq, and than i finished my service in supply... And working with men and women that are stuck together and have to work with one another on a day to day bases is just like high school.....

You have young people that have raging sex drives, and they don't look at women like there sisters they look at them like women they want to have sex with, and it happens none stop.....

[tim.ned@gmail.com]

Jaybear.. you don't understand the modern military...... Becasue men and women serve together, there is so much foolen around going on.... Every mouth people were getting busted for having sex with each other... Its just what happens when you bring men and women together.... and now that gays can be open about their life style its just gona cause more Drama.... I don't think gays should be in the military for the same reason i think women shouldn't serve in the military... THey are a distraction.... I did two tours of Combat in Iraq, and than i finished my service in supply... And working with men and women that are stuck together and have to work with one another on a day to day bases is just like high school.....

You have young people that have raging sex drives, and they don't look at women like there sisters they look at them like women they want to have sex with, and it happens none stop.....

I never served honestavner but appreciate the input of someone that has. I'm not a good judge on this issue but respect the opinion of those in uniform.

Thanks for your service to our country and the best to you and your family!

[NRAED]

I have no problem with gay people in the military as long as they do not make moves on other men. I would say that ninety eight percent of gays in the military keep it to themselves anyway. The problems will arise when you get the two percent that are swishers who want everybody to know they are gay, I am afraid this will cause problems. I was stationed on a patrol boat and the deckies slept in the forecastle in very close proximity, a swisher would not be accepted in a case like that.
I am not sure what the answer is but some of these generals and admirals are kissing Obama's butt, they damn well know what problems will arise but they are looking to get that extra star or plum assignment.
They want women on nuclear subs and want special quarters for them should they become pregnant, how idiotic is that ?

[btorocco]

I am not sure what the answer is but some of these generals and admirals are kissing Obama's butt, they damn well know what problems will arise but they are looking to get that extra star or plum assignment.

You're absolutely right Ed. Some of these generals and admirals have only their own ambition and seek promotion or political office at any cost, very similar to the politicized police brass the left drags out every time they're banging the 'gun control' drums.

[NRAED]

If you notice they never ask the cop on the street only the political appointees.I am afraid our system needs some major repairs.

[btorocco]

If you notice they never ask the cop on the street only the political appointees.

Right. Here's a quote from someone higher up who never forgot he was a street cop; Lt. Lowell Duckett: "Gun control has not worked in D.C. The only people who have guns are criminals. We have the strictest gun laws in the nation and one of the highest murder rates. It's quicker to pull your Smith & Wesson than to dial 911 if you're being robbed." Special Assistant to DC Police Chief; President, Black Police Caucus, The Washington Post, March 22, 1996.

[btorocco]

Getting back on topic, I thought I'd let this gentleman's voice be heard here; I thought "Don't Ask Don't Tell" was working fine in the military. Recently I had the opportunity to discuss the topic with an Admiral who agreed, as do most people with any military experience. What civilians do in the privacy of their bedrooms is, and should be, their own decision. What soldiers do in a squad bay should be governed by another set of rules. Teaching 19 year old men to be professional killers is tough work and it doesn't need to be muddled with who is dating who in the platoon. With all the challenges our military faces our politicians have decided that our military is not gay enough. Clearly the reason we have not defeated the Taliban in Afghanistan is because of a lack of gayness.

Have a Happy New Year,

Mike Piccione
Editor, Guns & Patriots

[NRAED]

If you look at history and the demise of the Roman Empire that should tell you something. We ignore the fact that during the thirties in Nazi Germany we had the Hitler Youth who were taught to hate. It seems the Muslim's have taken the same tack and teach hate in their schools (madrassa's).
The points being is that the Romans degenerated and the empire collapsed. The Muslim world is taking a page out of Hitler's book and are calling it religion.
The old adage still rings true, "Those who ignore history are bound to repeat it." Today all you have to do is look around you and you see a president who lacks the guts to do the job a president who has no use for congress as proved by his back door EPA thing because Cap and Trade was defeated. We live in troubled times and things are not getting any better. I fear my grand children will live in a world far different from the world I was raised in.