Bowing To Social Justice Insanity, U.S. Army Prepares For Admission Of Transgenders

a reply to: burdman30ott6

And you very well could be right.

We will have to see. Freedom is a messy business.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

I think we're pushing an unnatural and dangerous rate of social change in this area.

The Ancient Roman Military was known for its bisexuality. I'm just sayin...........

The military industrial complex doesn´t matter if the people, that sell their asses to the military, are gay or whatever, because:

Cannonfodder is Cannonfoder, LGBT people die the same like heteros for the wars and profits of rich circles...
And that is what cannonfodder is everytime, NOT rich!

a reply to: windword

So? We aren't in ancient Rome nor is our mindset. Society didn't develop intolerance overnight, so it seems fairly asinine to expect it to evaporate overnight. Ask any health expert about sustainable weight loss and they will say "slow and steady" leads to long term success while starvation diets lead to crash, burn, and regaining all you lost plus more.

a reply to: seasonal

As long as they don't defect to radical Islam or North Korea if stationed in South Korea (Since SJWs typically have a weird crush with both) all in the name of fighting "White Supremacy" and calling for safe spaces while in the battlefield then I see nothing wrong with transsexuals in the military.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

So? We aren't in ancient Rome nor is our mindset.

Is that right? I do not concur.

As to your insinuation that the military is headed in some unnatural direction, I merely provided you with a counter point, that the oh so successful Roman army, that dominated for centuries, were perfectly able to tolerate the LGBT, and moreover, make that community work for them in a strategic way.

a reply to: burgerbuddy

As long as they can follow orders and kill the enemy who gives a damn how they dress or what hey believe they are.
If a soldier thinks he is a leprechaun but can take out 5 terrorists with one bullet from a mile away , will hell I say here have a gold coin for your pot and keep on winning!

a reply to: TinySickTears

In theory, that sort of thing can fall under "alternative sentencing" or "conditional sentencing." As long as it's not illegal in whatever area they're in for the judge to offer it or the prosecutor to suggest it, they can theoretically do it.

In practice, the military is under no obligation whatsoever to accept the person's enlistment, and as far as I know they each have regulations against accepting applicants in that situation.

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: dragonridr

If you can comment accurately, do you think this is still an issue?

Yes here's the problem who do you get in the military?? You get jocks and attitudes they have in high school takes a decade or so to disappear. So a lot goes on back in base. However put people in combat like Iraq the petty stuff disappears

a reply to: windword

What was the social constraints and stigma in ancient Rome? Is this truly apples to apples.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: TinySickTears

In theory, that sort of thing can fall under "alternative sentencing" or "conditional sentencing." As long as it's not illegal in whatever area they're in for the judge to offer it or the prosecutor to suggest it, they can theoretically do it.

In practice, the military is under no obligation whatsoever to accept the person's enlistment, and as far as I know they each have regulations against accepting applicants in that situation.

The military no longer accepts individuals with a record. It disqualifies you from service

a reply to: seasonal

The art of war says: eveyone is useful.

A soldier missing one leg can still shoot. An armless soldier can still use the other arm to build or cook.

A weak soldier may be able to think. A fighting soldier may need a doctor.

Either its all a war effort, or its just someone elses war.

We may be fine now as far as numbers of recruits VS needs are concerned. When we arent it wont matter who is who. Whats the difference between then and now?

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: seasonal

The art of war says, eveyone is useful.

A soldier missing one leg can still shoot. An armless soldier can still use the other arm to build or cook.

A weak soldier may be able to think, a fighting soldier may need a doctor.

Either its all a war effort, or its just someone elses war.

Yeah that's not true at all. In combat a weak link gets others killed. When you have someone injured they become a major liability. Ever try to fight while hauling someone on your back.

a reply to: seasonal

Hate to blow your mind but there are already transgender military members, post op sex changes and all, men who identify as women wearing long hair, female uniforms, with female genitalia, make up, the whole 9.....

a reply to: dragonridr

Thats a weakness in (Leadership) filling his role properly.

Someone who is physically incable of doing something, shouldnt.

Maybe he makes a great cook, maybe he sweeps and mops like no ones business.

We are all useful. It takes a village.

Edit to add:
Unless the best combat soldier learns to make his own weapons, get his own intelligence, take care of his personal logistical concerns, and wage a war....

Some gay soldiers arent a problem as long as they arent a problem.

Don't see a problem at all.
The only problem that exists would be any reduction in the standards that need to be passed for certain roles and that has nothing to do with a transgender issue. It should be applied to men and women.
There should be no bathroom nonsense, though, and certainly no special rules on uniform.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

The military standards are getting more strict, not less, that would elude to there being fewer manning issues.

a reply to: fatkid

What? Holy cow, you mean trans and homosexuality has been around for millennia.

Oh dear, you have blown my mind./sarc off

Read the posts in the thread. You are not Christopher Columbus. You are the guy wearing skinny jeans telling me what I already know while holding a specialty coffee.

some people have the balls, or lack thereof, to do what only 10% of US citizen do for this country, I say let them join.

as long as other people don't have to change their lives so other people can fit their lives in the armed forces, it's cool with me.