The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Breaking News => Topic started by: TVDOC on September 20, 2010, 01:24:52 PM
-
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/sep/16/new-gay-army/
Next week, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is expected to begin floor debate on a defense authorization bill that would repeal the Clinton-era "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy and allow homosexuals to serve openly in the armed forces. Last month, a top military official offered a glimpse of how the military might look should the new policy take effect: Those serving who oppose the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) agenda are no longer welcome.
Those were the views of Lt. Gen. Thomas P. Bostick, the Army's deputy chief of staff in charge of personnel matters who spoke about "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" before several hundred troops at the European Command headquarters in Stuttgart, Germany. "Unfortunately, we have a minority of service members who are still racists and bigoted and you will never be able to get rid of all of them," Lt. Gen. Bostick said. "But these people opposing this new policy will need to get with the program, and if they can't, they need to get out. No matter how much training and education of those in opposition, you're always going to have those that oppose this on moral and religious grounds just like you still have racists today."
The strong words take additional significance from Lt. Gen. Bostick's direct involvement with a Pentagon panel charged with shaping military policy on this issue. Although Lt. Gen. Bostick presented the question of homosexuals in the military as if it were about civil rights, it is nothing of the kind. The services must discriminate to function. Those who are too old, too weak or too overweight must be shown the door even when similar actions in the private sector might spark a lawsuit. The reason for the military's existence is to win battles and wars, not to ensure feelings aren't hurt or to serve as a playground for social experimentation.
The military's long-standing ban on homosexual conduct is rooted in the principles of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which also criminalizes adulterous conduct among heterosexuals insofar as it undermines the good order and discipline of the armed forces. Lt. Gen. Bostick suggested he would employ the same strict disciplinary standards to provide "education and training" that would ensure soldiers, sailors and airmen embrace the new LGBT agenda.
<exerpted>
Balance at link.......
doc
-
Yeah, DCSPER, good luck filling the ranks with that plan and attitude. The kids that enlist are not on the same sheet of music with the inside-the-Beltway thought process of Pentagon generals. Plus there will be a surge of E5 and E6 departures on ETS as well, but not enough to match the destruction Carter wrought, I think.
-
Damn, **** him. :fuelfire:
When I was active duty, I would have died of mortification had I been forced to shower with women who might be looking at me with lust.
I have no real beef with the LGBT community when they live and let live, but this constant comparison of them with the MLK movement is WRONG.
The only way I could see letting openly gays serve in the military without impacting morale would be to segregate people according to sexual preference. And it's not the same thing as showering with a black female-we have the same lady parts.
Well, I guess this makes me a homophobe along with the racist I already am for not worshipping the big smelly feet of teh One.
-
Well, I guess this makes me a homophobe along with the racist I already am for not worshipping the big smelly feet of teh One.
:rotf:
-
Yeah, DCSPER, good luck filling the ranks with that plan and attitude. The kids that enlist are not on the same sheet of music with the inside-the-Beltway thought process of Pentagon generals. Plus there will be a surge of E5 and E6 departures on ETS as well, but not enough to match the destruction Carter wrought, I think.
Hi,
I wonder if this is the precursor to the portion of the bill to allow amnesty to illegals who wish to serve in our military. I can see the day when they enlist, get amnesty, then get kicked out of the military or file for consciencious objector status.
This does not pass the smell test with me.
regards,
5412
-
"education and training" that would ensure soldiers, sailors and airmen embrace the new LGBT agenda.
He skipped the Marines....I guess he knew they wouldn't listen to his wussy ass. Just like they don't mix sexs in basic training.
-
I have served with several gay soldiers both male and female.
OK, fine. Whatevs.
But FFS I'm willing to hazard a guess that Christians outnumber the gays by a substantial margin.
-
Something just doesn't sit right with this whole issue.
So, straights, Catholics and people that oppose gays/lesbians are to be shown the door and not fight for their Country because the "elitists" say so?! WOW! How much more ****ed up can these idiots in Washington make this Country?!?! Maybe I don't want to know.
-
"Unfortunately, we have a minority of service members who are still racists and bigoted and you will never be able to get rid of all of them," Lt. Gen. Bostick said. "But these people opposing this new policy will need to get with the program, and if they can't, they need to get out. No matter how much training and education of those in opposition, you're always going to have those that oppose this on moral and religious grounds
Sounds to me like Bostick is a prejudiced bigot himself. It takes a lot of hatred to object to free exercise of the First Amendment religous rights.
-
I'm just waiting for the lefties to start screaming and beating their chests as to how all the pickle puffers in the military are now proselytizing the straights, like when they scream and cry as to how Christians are trying to "convert" non-Christians (which is, of course, total crap.)
-
for take over by whom are we preparing?
-
for take over by whom are we preparing?
Whoever gets here first with the biggest.... "bats".
-
Imus was sniveling about the 'Bigotry' in DADT this morning. I can't stand that burnt-out trainwreck of a man and his Liberal Manhattan buddy guests, but I do flip to it for the morning stock news and futures.
-
He's trying to backtrack now. He's issued a statement via the DoD website saying he was...get ready...misquoted.
:whatever:
-
Bostick is simply toeing the Lord Zero line and putting forth "the word" about the demise of DADT and the continuation of social experimentation within the military.
This isn't the first time that the military was the focus group of social experimentation. When Truman forced desegregation of the military back in the late Forties, there was considerable opposition to that.
Fighting alongside a person with skin color that's different is one thing, but trying to make sense of a peter puffer's decisions is something else altogether. :mental:
It looks to me like Bostick & Co. have forgotten all about "good order and discipline". I suppose now that the UCMJ will have to be rewritten to permit those same deviant sexual practices that it had once forbidden.
-
... It looks to me like Bostick & Co. have forgotten all about "good order and discipline". I suppose now that the UCMJ will have to be rewritten to permit those same deviant sexual practices that it had once forbidden.
I wonder if the military will eliminate the adultery clause in the UCMJ, too??
-
I wonder if the military will eliminate the adultery clause in the UCMJ, too??
Hmmm. Don't know if the "adultery" charge applies to married military only, but sodomy will definitely have to be stricken.
Sodomy - it's what the peter puffers are all about. :whatever:
-
I wonder if the military will eliminate the adultery clause in the UCMJ, too??
Wasn't it suspended from 1993 until 2001?
:uhsure:
-
Hmmm. Don't know if the "adultery" charge applies to married military only, but sodomy will definitely have to be stricken.
Sodomy - it's what the peter puffers are all about. :whatever:
If they repeal DADT...you don't think that will be the next step. Forcing the militray to recognize same sex marriages?
I sure as hell believe that will be next.
Repealing DADT is the proverbial camels nose under the tent flap for the military.
-
If they repeal DADT...you don't think that will be the next step. Forcing the militray to recognize same sex marriages?
I sure as hell believe that will be next.
Repealing DADT is the proverbial camels nose under the tent flap for the military.
Yep, I do think that's the next step, but dontcha think that the overall judicial battle over same-sex marriages would have to be waged first? And "won"?
Currently only Iowa, Connecticut, Masshole, Vermont, and Sparky's hangout, along with DC, perform them. It's a bit of a stretch for the military to "recognize" those same-sex marriages and not some dude's common law "husband" from, say, Wisconsin - not that it can't be done.
I see the battle waging first in the courtroom, then the moonbats can force that shit down DOD's throat (no pun intended).
The moonbats can be patient, just as they've been steadily eroding at the will of the people regarding DADT and same-sex marriages.
-
I wonder if the military will eliminate the adultery clause in the UCMJ, too??
Not a chance. BTW--I saw a hell of a lot more people separated for adultery than homosexuality.
Then again, I wasn't an airedale, or it might well be the other way around.
-
Currently only Iowa, Connecticut, Masshole, Vermont, and Sparky's hangout, along with DC, perform them.
And in all of those cases, the will of the people was either circumvented, or never sought. Judicial fiat in each case.
Oh, and don't think John Stephen isn't clubbing Governor Lynch over the head for pulling that little trick.
-
Not a chance. BTW--I saw a hell of a lot more people separated for adultery than homosexuality.
Then again, I wasn't an airedale, or it might well be the other way around.
Interesting. That wasn't my experience at all. Saw a few get separated for the gay thing, but most of them hid it well enough to stay in until they were separated for other reasons (HIV for one).
Never saw anybody get the axe for adultery. Ever.
-
Yep, I do think that's the next step, but dontcha think that the overall judicial battle over same-sex marriages would have to be waged first? And "won"?
Nope I foresee some kind of dual attack. Or forcing the military to accept them along with the DADT repeal. Then using that as the "justification" to make ALL states accept it.
It's a bit of a stretch for the military to "recognize" those same-sex marriages and not some dude's common law "husband" from, say, Wisconsin - not that it can't be done.
IMHO...given what I've seen this current batch of Liberals do in 22 months...NOTHING is stretch anymore.
-
Interesting. That wasn't my experience at all. Saw a few get separated for the gay thing, but most of them hid it well enough to stay in until they were separated for other reasons (HIV for one).
Never saw anybody get the axe for adultery. Ever.
While I wasn't AF, I do remember the first female B-52 pilot was booted for it.
There were guys here and there doing WestPac/boomer widows crap, but the worst I personally saw was when I was in recruiting. Admiral Watson (CNRC), the Area 8 CMC, and my Chief Recruiter ALL got the boot for nailing one a Zone Supervisor's wife. Also turns out the ZS's wife was a smokin hawt 21-year old who walked into the NRS when she was like 19. The Zone Sup, smart guy that he was, basically found a reason to permanently DQ her so he could nail her (can't be boffing applicants and DEPpers, that's a big no-no).
-
WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama's choice to lead the Marine Corps told the Senate Tuesday that Congress should not repeal the law barring gays from serving openly in the military, dealing a blow to gay rights advocates just hours before a crucial test vote.
Associated Press (http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2010/09/21/general-us-gays-military_7946887.html?boxes=Homepagebusinessnews)
-
Is it the wrong time to point out what branch of service the top guy in uniform is that's SUPPORTING the repeal of DADT?
Or the fact that the SecDef is former USAF?
:fuelfire:
-
Associated Press (http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2010/09/21/general-us-gays-military_7946887.html?boxes=Homepagebusinessnews)
I see they need Collins vote....hmmm she wants to wait. Yeah until after November. This bunch will not be happy until they can destroy this fine military.
-
Eupher--in other news, two CO's in Bangor have been fired in the past week for sticking their dinks in women not their wives.
-
Eupher--in other news, two CO's in Bangor have been fired in the past week for sticking their dinks in women not their wives.
Worst I saw was an up and coming two star..youngest one in the Army...former commander of the RTB...25th ID CG..poster boy for the Rangers etc...get dropped to Colonel and forced to retire for doing that.
-
Associated Press (http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2010/09/21/general-us-gays-military_7946887.html?boxes=Homepagebusinessnews)
I can see that appointment being withdrawn. Can't have any opposition to Teh Wun.
Edited to add a quote from the article:
Pop star Lady Gaga led a political rally in favor of repeal in Maine on Monday to pressure Collins and Sen. Olympia Snowe to side with Democrats on the issue. Lady Gaga said it was unjust to have goodhearted gay soldiers booted from military service while straight soldiers who harbor hatred toward gays are allowed to fight for their country.
She suggested a new policy should target straight soldiers who are "uncomfortable" with gay soldiers in their midst.
"Our new law is called 'If you don't like it, go home!'" she said.
Sigh. These moronic dipshits who wouldn't know a rucksack from their next bong hit never fail to amaze me with their stupidity.
-
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39286687/ns/politics-capitol_hill/
WASHINGTON — A Senate bill to repeal the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy appeared headed for defeat Tuesday, a major setback for gay groups that saw the vote as their last chance this year to overturn the 17-year-old ban.
Advocates had been optimistic that the Democratic-controlled White House and Congress could overcome objections to repeal of the law barring gays from serving openly in the military. The move is unpopular among Republicans, military officers and social conservatives.
But in the end,
Yeah I ended that article like that on purpose, who proofreads for them? In the end :lmao:
-
Only a few of them actually want to fight for their country, this is mainly about REMF jobs, and tapping into benefits and medical care.
-
Democrats fell short of the 60 votes needed to advance the legislation, which authorized $726 billion in defense spending including a pay raise for troops.
Associated Press (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/09/21/procedural-vote-stalls-defense-repeal-dont-ask-dont-tell/)
Another AP article. Again.
-
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/09/21/procedural-vote-stalls-defense-repeal-dont-ask-dont-tell/
WASHINGTON -- Senate Republicans have blocked an effort to repeal the law
banning gays from serving openly in the military.
The partisan vote was a defeat for gay rights groups who saw the provision in a defense authorization bill as their last chance any time soon to overturn the law known as "don't ask, don't tell."
Democrats fell short of the 60 votes needed to adv
I hope this means the DREAM Act is dead.
-
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/09/21/procedural-vote-stalls-defense-repeal-dont-ask-dont-tell/
I hope this means the DREAM Act is dead.
At least for now it is. Notice that that portion of the bill is getting little play in the media.
-
Hi,
Following is the Yahoo link. I find it interesting, but not the least surprising, they find a way to blame it on the Republicans, they have a bullet-proof democrat majority in the senate, the Repbulicans could not block the bill by themselves if they wanted to.
regards,
5412
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_gays_military
PS: There is one scary paragraph in the report however:
Democratic Sens. Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor of Arkansas sided with Republicans to block the bill. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., also voted against the measure as a procedural tactic. Under Senate rules, doing so enables him to revive the bill at a later date if he wants.
What this means to me is this. If the democrats get their asses kicked, which they will and Reid may be one of them, then their parting shot will be to bring this back to the floor and shove it down the throats of America. Of course they forgot to mention there was a portion of the bill to lift the abortion ban, and another to grant amnesty to illegals.....somehow that was overlooked by the writer of the article. Must just be coincidence.
-
The practice and process by which the majority party, whether it's them OR our guys, amends bells, whistles, and pork butts onto all the critical appropriation and authorization bills is one of the things about Congress that most absolutely pisses me off.
-
It's ok. It won't matter after November . The Right will just undo what ever the Left does before then. They can blame the Right if they want to but the votes are in and they can't be retracted. All anyone with a brain has to do is look up who voted for and against.
-
The practice and process by which the majority party, whether it's them OR our guys, amends bells, whistles, and pork butts onto all the critical appropriation and authorization bills is one of the things about Congress that most absolutely pisses me off.
Hi,
This paragraph in the write up pissed me off today. We could get this shoved down our throats, amnesty and all by a lame-duck democrat congress.
Democratic Sens. Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor of Arkansas sided with Republicans to block the bill. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., also voted against the measure as a procedural tactic. Under Senate rules, doing so enables him to revive the bill at a later date if he wants.
regards,
5412
-
It's ok. It won't matter after November . The Right will just undo what ever the Left does before then. They can blame the Right if they want to but the votes are in and they can't be retracted. All anyone with a brain has to do is look up who voted for and against.
I dunno about that. I'm not certain that the Republicans consider DADT enough of an issue to actually undo it and let out the peter puffers and rug munchers after they've officially been allowed in.
Sorta like locking the barn after the horse is stolen - won't really work.
Furthermore, I just don't think it's enough of a Republican hot button issue. It certainly is for the Dems and the corresponding gays and lesbos, but for the Repubs to want to go to battle on that score? I ain't so sure.....
-
Hi,
Following is the Yahoo link. I find it interesting, but not the least surprising, they find a way to blame it on the Republicans, they have a bullet-proof democrat majority in the senate, the Repbulicans could not block the bill by themselves if they wanted to.
regards,
5412
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_gays_military
PS: There is one scary paragraph in the report however:
Democratic Sens. Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor of Arkansas sided with Republicans to block the bill. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., also voted against the measure as a procedural tactic. Under Senate rules, doing so enables him to revive the bill at a later date if he wants.
What this means to me is this. If the democrats get their asses kicked, which they will and Reid may be one of them, then their parting shot will be to bring this back to the floor and shove it down the throats of America. Of course they forgot to mention there was a portion of the bill to lift the abortion ban, and another to grant amnesty to illegals.....somehow that was overlooked by the writer of the article. Must just be coincidence.
I think if they get voted out they for sure will shove it down our throats.. this goes without saying.
-
I think if they get voted out they for sure will shove it down our throats.. this goes without saying.
Hi,
My guess is they would start with amnesty because as Limbaugh calls them "undocumented democrats", the abortion and gays issue would be secondary. I am not so sure there would not be revolution if they try it but that is not saying they will not. Particularly if Reid gets fired by the voters.
regards,
5412
-
Hi,
My guess is they would start with amnesty because as Limbaugh calls them "undocumented democrats", the abortion and gays issue would be secondary. I am not so sure there would not be revolution if they try it but that is not saying they will not. Particularly if Reid gets fired by the voters.
regards,
5412
I think they are going to try it, whether it is thru congress or a EO. They need these votes.
-
Bostick is simply toeing the Lord Zero line and putting forth "the word" about the demise of DADT and the continuation of social experimentation within the military.
This isn't the first time that the military was the focus group of social experimentation. When Truman forced desegregation of the military back in the late Forties, there was considerable opposition to that.
Fighting alongside a person with skin color that's different is one thing, but trying to make sense of a peter puffer's decisions is something else altogether. :mental:
It looks to me like Bostick & Co. have forgotten all about "good order and discipline". I suppose now that the UCMJ will have to be rewritten to permit those same deviant sexual practices that it had once forbidden.
Gimme a break! These asshole bandits don't have the guts to eat *****, but I should trust them to cover my backside during enemy fire?
Well..................I guess they might if we were butt buddies, otherwise, I kinda doubt it!
This ain't gonna happen! Unless of course the Bumbler and his "cocksuckers", are willin' to leave our country unguarded!
Hmmmmmm.......
-
Hey dumbo. You really know how to ruin a country don't you? Throwing all these variables into society. Breaking down our military, killing capitalism, killing economy and jobs, and slowly taking away our freedoms.
Take a walk you f'en imposter!! :bird: :censored:
-
Gimme a break! These asshole bandits don't have the guts to eat *****, but I should trust them to cover my backside during enemy fire?
Well..................I guess they might if we were butt buddies, otherwise, I kinda doubt it!
This ain't gonna happen! Unless of course the Bumbler and his "cocksuckers", are willin' to leave our country unguarded!
Hmmmmmm.......
Hi,
When the hell is someone going to discuss what to me is the real issue. If you allow gays openly in the military, yeah you break down discipline, but it is an all volunteer military. What do you do when the gays outnumber the men? Sooner or later it will happen and then what happens to national defense. What happens when gays get in positions to sit on promotion boards, you know damn well that will be the over riding issue for promotion as opposed to qualifications. It will be a total breakdown of our military. Eventually folks will stop enlisting other than gays and then it is all over.
Why doesn't some general speak up? Then again they may have and BO doesn't give a shit.
regards,
5412
-
The DoD only has to make sexual orientation the sixth protected class (first five are race, gender, religion, national origin, and color) and about half of what is said in an infantry company on a daily basis will be reason for a complaint. The commanders of the various units would be obligated to get rid of those service members who couldn't or wouldn't toe the line.
-
The DoD only has to make sexual orientation the sixth protected class (first five are race, gender, religion, national origin, and color) and about half of what is said in an infantry company on a daily basis will be reason for a complaint. The commanders of the various units would be obligated to get rid of those service members who couldn't or wouldn't toe the line.
Bingo. Spot on, docstew. You've got 'em in order of priority too. Woe to the poor bastard who says something about a Sikh wearing a turban and sporting a beard when it's time for NBC training. Insensitive shit that he is, he's ostracized, ridiculed, and mustered out.
How many times have you seen promotion quotas completely override common sense and clear qualifications?
-
Alot of people are also forgetting that if any Gay service member is found out to be so by the Jihadist they would make certain that they suffered more then just any old Infidel.
-
Sparky,
In the mid 1970's when Hubby was an instructor at Mare Island NPS in Vallejo, there were the same problems we have today.
That poor man came home every night with a few students, I and the kids would leave them at the kitchen table as he tutored them in theory and math. Now this was before the cheap hand held calculators came out, all was slide rule then. Makes me wonder what would have happend had they had calculators back then.
The pressure on the students was so extraordinary that the students wives were begging them to find a way to get the heck out of the Navy.
So smart, these kids could run a reactor with a blind fold on. Most of the students had been through Sub school, trained in Idaho but to go Nuke the pressure was just too much for some of them.
They wanted out--not just the Nuke service but the military as well.
Hubby went nuts one night, his most promissing student had cracked and gone to his CO and told him he was gay. So long ago I have a problem remembering so far back, but this really rocked his world.
We have a big problem here with Gay servicemen and woman. Yes they should be able to serve but in what capacity, ?
Seems strange that a sex preference should have anything to do with the military, darn but a gay and a heterosexual, bank robber or serial killer can all die in battle together.
I am wandering off subject, but if my house caught fire and a gay firefighter risked his life to save my life----
I am the victim of road rage and a gay cop kept a mad man from killing me---
I have a heart attack and the surgeon is gay------
We go to war and the people that lay their life on the line to keep MY freedom is gay------
I am more concerned with allowing woman on Subs then I am with all of the above.
-
Sparky,
In the mid 1970's when Hubby was an instructor at Mare Island NPS in Vallejo, there were the same problems we have today.
That poor man came home every night with a few students, I and the kids would leave them at the kitchen table as he tutored them in theory and math. Now this was before the cheap hand held calculators came out, all was slide rule then. Makes me wonder what would have happend had they had calculators back then.
The pressure on the students was so extraordinary that the students wives were begging them to find a way to get the heck out of the Navy.
So smart, these kids could run a reactor with a blind fold on. Most of the students had been through Sub school, trained in Idaho but to go Nuke the pressure was just too much for some of them.
They wanted out--not just the Nuke service but the military as well.
Hubby went nuts one night, his most promissing student had cracked and gone to his CO and told him he was gay. So long ago I have a problem remembering so far back, but this really rocked his world.
We have a big problem here with Gay servicemen and woman. Yes they should be able to serve but in what capacity, ?
Seems strange that a sex preference should have anything to do with the military, darn but a gay and a heterosexual, bank robber or serial killer can all die in battle together.
I am wandering off subject, but if my house caught fire and a gay firefighter risked his life to save my life----
I am the victim of road rage and a gay cop kept a mad man from killing me---
I have a heart attack and the surgeon is gay------
We go to war and the people that lay their life on the line to keep MY freedom is gay------
I am more concerned with allowing woman on Subs then I am with all of the above.
So Vesta, do I take this to mean you are auntie-lesbo, don't like changing from Bull Nuke to Bull Dyke?
and, how say you this or did you see it yet?
http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php?topic=48974.msg541593;topicseen
Cheating? :fuelfire:
-
It occurred to me, finally, to figure out who this dipshit is. Well, what a surprise he's a black guy. With a hate for whitey, I'd guess.
And gays complain blacks don't support them. :whatever:
http://www.armyg1.army.mil/dcsg1bio.asp
-
So Vesta, do I take this to mean you are auntie-lesbo, don't like changing from Bull Nuke to Bull Dyke?
and, how say you this or did you see it yet?
http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php?topic=48974.msg541593;topicseen
Cheating? :fuelfire:
Chief Allen, is this YOU?
I gave it a look and unfortunately cannot say much about the program in the New Navy. At my age I remember Rickover and Zumwalt, one a genius the other an Idiot.
Sparky is the one to talk to. But remember Sparky has been out of the program for years also, we need some young blood that has been through the program in the last 5-6 years.
Hell my uncle was a sub sailor on the pig boats in WW2 and one may say things have changed a wee bit since he qualified. He is Head Honcho at the Museum on the ship yard, he is over 80 years old and there is little about Sub history he does not know.
I would not wish woman on Subs for obvious reasons, some fast attacks have to be deployed for 6-9 months at times, or were back in time. Even with 2 crews on the FBM's and the 3 months in 3 months out, allot of crap can happen with an all male crew, throw in females and the catalyst will cause Sub Sunk.
As far as people cheating at NPS I am not surprised but these guys don't last long, with all the in the past at least investigation into the mental health of those confined in close quarters for months, usually it is the crew whose lives depend on them will be the first to pick out a someone that they do not trust.
We had that problem in town with the 2 crew members of was it the Grandville that beat up an old guy and lied and to the police and their Captain about what happend---ended their carear and freedom.
Had to be some kind of action caused by Drugs.
-
Bingo. Spot on, docstew. You've got 'em in order of priority too. Woe to the poor bastard who says something about a Sikh wearing a turban and sporting a beard when it's time for NBC training. Insensitive shit that he is, he's ostracized, ridiculed, and mustered out.
How many times have you seen promotion quotas completely override common sense and clear qualifications?
Religious accomodations such as would be required for, in your example, a Sikh have to be approved by DA. AR 670-1 still provides the guidance for religious accommodation of the wear of the uniform. A Seventh Day Adventist can legally be ordered to wear pt shorts like everyone else until they have a waiver approved (which probably wouldn't be).
As far as promotion quotas, I can't speak on that, haven't gotten a look from a centralized board yet.
-
Sparky,
In the mid 1970's when Hubby was an instructor at Mare Island NPS in Vallejo, there were the same problems we have today.
That poor man came home every night with a few students, I and the kids would leave them at the kitchen table as he tutored them in theory and math. Now this was before the cheap hand held calculators came out, all was slide rule then. Makes me wonder what would have happend had they had calculators back then.
The pressure on the students was so extraordinary that the students wives were begging them to find a way to get the heck out of the Navy.
So smart, these kids could run a reactor with a blind fold on. Most of the students had been through Sub school, trained in Idaho but to go Nuke the pressure was just too much for some of them.
They wanted out--not just the Nuke service but the military as well.
Hubby went nuts one night, his most promissing student had cracked and gone to his CO and told him he was gay. So long ago I have a problem remembering so far back, but this really rocked his world.
We have a big problem here with Gay servicemen and woman. Yes they should be able to serve but in what capacity, ?
Seems strange that a sex preference should have anything to do with the military, darn but a gay and a heterosexual, bank robber or serial killer can all die in battle together.
I am wandering off subject, but if my house caught fire and a gay firefighter risked his life to save my life----
I am the victim of road rage and a gay cop kept a mad man from killing me---
I have a heart attack and the surgeon is gay------
We go to war and the people that lay their life on the line to keep MY freedom is gay------
I am more concerned with allowing woman on Subs then I am with all of the above.
Blah blah blah...blah...blah...blah...fag-ivity is NOT the norm nor should it ever be. It is a genetic freak that should be sequestered in a hole and buried.
The ONLY reason "Don't ASSk, Don't Tell" is being pushed by the left is to destroy our military, nothing more.
Fags suck...literally...you know it, I know it, so does the rest of the world. We only put up with their feces covered dicks because the lamestream media panders to them.
A.I.D.S...It's what's for gay dinner...
Snarkle...
-
The ONLY reason "Don't ASSk, Don't Tell" is being pushed by the left is to destroy our military, nothing more.
Unfortunately, I think you're spot on PatriotGame. :hi5:
-
Unfortunately, I think you're spot on PatriotGame. :hi5:
Ever watch the movie HAIR .? The board of selection scene with 7 or 8 selection members that were all gay was a hoot. I am trying to remember the song they sang as the drafted came into the room naked to be errrr examined. [ Could it have been Black Boys Are Delicious.?]
While the enlisted and lower level officers and Mustangs are targeted we forget that the top brass is not immune from this behavior any more then top honchos in the civilian world.
I have a hard time believing the left wants to Gut our military, I believe they are desperate to have someone, anyone, serve to keep from having a Draft and them getting called up to serve. Those that have sons and are of modest means, in no way do they want THEIR children to go to war. They go to college and stay there for 20 years.
You know back when I was a kid, if a boy over the age of 17 got into trouble with the law, all to often the judge would give them a choice, go to jail for 2 years or join the military. If they got sent home from boot camp, they had to serve out their time in jail.
No parent I know of wants to see their son associating with the Gays, in Civilian life or Military. Being forced to sleep with, eat with and train with homosexuals is now the {new} reason to dissuade our kids from both the Left and Right from enlisting.
Sad , but shit rolls down hill from the top, and from what I have seen the top starts with who ever is president.
Rant over---for now.
-
I have a hard time believing the left wants to Gut our military, I believe they are desperate to have someone, anyone, serve to keep from having a Draft and them getting called up to serve. Those that have sons and are of modest means, in no way do they want THEIR children to go to war. They go to college and stay there for 20 years.
I don't. I've seen it. Guys older than me used to tell me about the "hollow force" under Carter. I didn't believe it until I served under Clinton and saw the same shit happening.
Oh, and in the last 25 years, which party has been the one primarily responsible for introducing bills to reinstate the draft? (Hint: Not Republicans.)
You know back when I was a kid, if a boy over the age of 17 got into trouble with the law, all to often the judge would give them a choice, go to jail for 2 years or join the military.
Bullshit then, illegal now. Any kind of "agreement" of that type will disqualify a person from enlisting in ANY service branch, period.
-
I have a hard time believing the left wants to Gut our military
You can't be serious. Barney Frank "I want to cut the Pentagon's budget by 25%", not to mention the Clinton administration's treatment of the armed services.
Put down the rubbing alcohol. It's not good for you.
-
You can't be serious. Barney Frank "I want to cut the Pentagon's budget by 25%", not to mention the Clinton administration's treatment of the armed services.
Put down the rubbing alcohol. It's not good for you.
Think of the boast heard about the first thing your are going to do to the wife after months at sea.......
In her case hubby could claim 'mission accomplished'. :lmao:
-
Bullshit then, illegal now. Any kind of "agreement" of that type will disqualify a person from enlisting in ANY service branch, period.
I'm not sure if you mean "Bullshit, it didn't happen," or "Bullshit, what a deplorable practice."
I would agree that that kind of "plea bargaining" pretty much precludes a person from enlisting today, but in January 1975 when I enlisted, that was very much the practice at the time.
-
Things used to be so simple back in 1964. The Drill Instructor would ask, "Do we have any Girl Scouts this morning?" If anyone raised their hand, they were well on there way to getting their "Undesirable" on yellow paper....no proof needed, just raise your hand....and some did that weren't.
Wonder how they have done in life?
-
Things used to be so simple back in 1964. The Drill Instructor would ask, "Do we have any Girl Scouts this morning?" If anyone raised their hand, they were well on there way to getting their "Undesirable" on yellow paper....no proof needed, just raise your hand....and some did that weren't.
Wonder how they have done in life?
6 Senators, 8 Congressmen, 12 Mayors, and a Partrage in a Pear Tree.
-
I'm not sure if you mean "Bullshit, it didn't happen," or "Bullshit, what a deplorable practice."
I would agree that that kind of "plea bargaining" pretty much precludes a person from enlisting today, but in January 1975 when I enlisted, that was very much the practice at the time.
The latter.
-
The latter.
Our old bud CEO (I812) from SCC use to tell of being 'offered' an alternative to jail time as a lad and I never found reason to doubt his story. One of the kids I worked with summers was from that area and got the same offer, probably from the same judge. In both cases they were just general run of the mill juvinille delinquents with no real criminal record. The draft was in full force so they figured what the heck why not take the out of jail since they would probably get drafted eventually.
As to the quality of their service? Meh, who knows. I do know one other kid who took an offer an went awol after boot. He did serve hard time once they caught him.