Obama to End Military's 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Policy, page 5
Pages: <<  2    3    4    5    6    7    8  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 8 times


reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 05:38 PM by DarkPassenger
Originally posted by dooper
If I serve in combat, I don't want any gays around me. I would tell every swinging . . person in the outfit, that if I get wounded and somehow need mouth to mouth, and I find out you're gay, pray I die, because I'll kill your nastyass if I survive. I don't want his mouth anywhere in the vicinity of me.


So, you'd kill someone who saved your life, because you found out it the guy who resuscitated you was gay? Can you explain that, because to me..it's #in' insane. If it was me, i'd be thanking God and the guy that saved my damn life. Just saying. And to swing it round for a second, what if it was a woman trying to resucitate you. Would you try and kill her because there's an small chance she wasn't completely hating the situation?

As an offside though, I do agree with what you said earlier in the post, about women in combat arms having separate fitness requirements. Imo, it's bull#. If they're not up to the same fitness standards as guys, then they shouldn't be in a combat role.

Bottom line, at least for me.. If someone's willing to fight, and possibly die for their country, then I think it's pretty #ed up of the country to say "Well, you can die for us, but as long as you keep part of yourself hidden, you know, just so we're not uncomfortable." Especially if they're fighting for their country, even when it doesn't give them the same legal rights as everyone else.

Edit: Dooper, seen you've explained what I asked in the post above mine. I can't understand it, but, I respect your opinion on the matter.

[edit on 15-1-2009 by DarkPassenger]


reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 05:49 PM by dooper
reply to post by DarkPassenger


I explained that I would tell everyone - IF you are gay and give me your blood or mouth to mouth, only THEN would I kill you, as you have now been warned.

I told new guys that we only had three rules. We don't throw down on kids, because kids don't choose their sorry-assed parents, much less choose their parent's sorry-assed politics. Kids are off limits.

We don't rape women. You find one in a free-fire zone and pop her, that's between you and your conscious. But they will never, ever be raped in this unit. You do it, there will be no courts martial. There will be summary punishment. It will be quick, and it will be over.

The third rule was no sleeping on guard. Because if you are sleeping, you would be found the next morning with a cut throat. Must have been the enemy, because who else would it be?

Give him a medal, and ship that POS home.

I'm not dying because some other silly SOB can't pull his freight. I'm not going to allow irresponsibility when all our lives are in his hands.

Combat isn't nice stuff. It isn't a nice relaxing job.

And military virtues are polar opposites of civic virtues. You want to apply civic virtues to an arena where civic virtues mean $#!T. Civic virtues will get you killed.

Be a truck driver, intelligence, communications, supply, computer analysis, anything but the combat arms.



reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 06:01 PM by rikk7111
Originally posted by jd140
reply to post by HunkaHunka



True, the Don't ask Don't tell policy is in place so commanders don't ask if you are gay. That is the DON'T ASK part.

The Don't tell part covers gay soldiers not letting other soldiers know that they are gay. If they do then they are discharged from the military.

If you are openly gay in the military you will be discharged. No questions asked. So yes it is in place to keep openly gays out of the military.

So you are half right.

The Don't ask Don't tell policy is in place for morale and should not be removed.

When you are deployed you have what is called shower tents. They are not private and are very cramped, with hundreds being pushed through every night. How comfortable do you think a young soldier is going to be when he has to shower a foot away from another soldier who he knows to be gay?

Do they shower with the females (if gay male) or with the men (if gay female)? Do they get their own shower time?

Having a gay male showering with other men would be as uncomfortable for the straight men as having females shower with the males.

There are other examples I can come up with if you need them to see that this is a very bad thing to do.




JD, I couldn't have said it better.............You hit the nail on the head.


reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 06:09 PM by Wotan
reply to post by dooper


So how would you feel if when wounded and taken to a hospital you are cared for by a gay male nurse?

BTW - You do know that blood is screened before a transfusion dont you?


reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 06:37 PM by dooper
reply to post by Wotan

Wotan, I would have zero problem if being treated by a gay nurse, male or female.

I will go as far as to suggest if one is gay, and considering joining the combat arms, I'd advise against it, or I'd make real sure that no one ever knew.

But my advice is squat. I once told my LT, who was working around me to stop, and go no further. He thought my advice was squat, and took another six steps or so.

We picked up the pieces as best we could and bagged them out, and then picked the tissue and pieces off each other.

But my advice is squat.

Let me ask you a rhetorical question. You have a known gay, and he gets shredded by an automatic weapon. There is blood everywhere, body fluids that would gag a maggot, and tissue is shredded enough to knock a buzzard off a gut wagon.

How anxious are you going to be to dive into his blood and tissue and try to save his life? This is combat. No gloves, no mask. No shield. Life or death. Right now. Decision time.

I'd do it, but G*DD@MN him! For making me feel this uncomfortable, and then worrying about infection.



reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 06:39 PM by jerico65
reply to post by Pfeil


Have you been in the military? Having someone rag your ass with that "recall getting any tongue" is mild considering some of the things I've heard.


reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 09:12 PM by paxnatus
I may not agree with everything said, but I really appreciate all the input.

However, I find it hard to believe, that maybe a couple of others and myself, who are non military have enough common sense to understand, that the change of DADT will be of no benefit whatsoever to our men and women in our military regardless if gay or straight.

It has been repeated over and over in this thread that civilian society and what we are used to in our everyday lives is worlds apart than life in the military. As it should be. I am all for civil rights and have several friends who are homosexual, I am not anti gay in any way. I am not trying to take away anyone's freedom. But here is my point, when faced with a life and death situation such as one in combat, there can be no distractions, second thoughts, hesitations, you just can't have that. Peoples lives are depending on you executing the exact plan at the exact time. If for even 1/4th of a second, you hesitate, somebody is going to die. This is a description of what the mindset is and HAS got to be. Clarity and focus is a must to be sucessful in any high stress situation. War, is the most stressful of any of these.

I have worked for years at a Level 1 trauma center. Basically everyone is flown to us because we are top. Meaning the best team around, along with cutting edge technology. We save lives, that's what we do.

I have been in numerous codes where nurses, who were new, panicked, dropped things, froze, cried and ran out of the room!!! People will die, if that behavior happens too much. One must stay sharp, work quickly, and stay focused in order to try and save a critical patient. We cannot afford
distractions of any kind. I am sure that if I was working to save the life of your loved one you would want me 100% there. Why not let these men and women do their jobs and give them all the support they need. They shouldn't have to worry about contracting a potentially fatal blood disease,
among other things, While working in the most stressful job on the planet.

In theory, some of you cannot understand how this could hurt, but it is the same in trauma, theory looks good on paper, theory isn't real life.

Again thanks for everyone's time.


reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 09:59 PM by gonzo610
I've read most of the post here and I am kind of confused. Because I see a lot of post about 'Feelings' the people in the military have.

I thought the military does not afford such luxuries?

I was never in the military this is true. But what does your 'feelings' have to do with your duty, honor, and responsibility to your country?
The only feeling they allow you to have is the sense of honor and duty. All others are going to get you killed.
The argument that the military have these feelings that are, so to say, homophobic is not a luxury any of them can afford.
The DADT rule doesn't change those 'feelings'. In fact right now they don't know who is gay or not. So the person standing next to them could be gay and they trust them now.
You earn someone trust it's not just given freely. If you do your an idiot and your lucky if you have 2 pennies to rub together.
Once that trust is earned the 'feelings' of someone being gay has been gone beyond. If not then they could have a problem serving with blacks, women, old people, teenagers, and whatever else you can through at them.
How long are we going to cow tow to these inferior people just to make them "FEEL" safe?

Maybe we should take them off the front lines, or give them a dolly, or give them some flowers.
Come on I can understand what your saying but the fact is the gay community will have to EARN their respect.
Just like the blacks did in WW2. If I remember correctly they weren't allowed to serve with the whites because they didn't 'Feel' like they should serve with the blacks.
But, they earned their respect and now serve right next to them.

Why can't the gay community be given the same chance.

DADT was a stupid idea to begin with. If the draft was to come along anyone who didn't want to serve would just say their gay and their off the hook. I know in the Vietnam era they didn't allow the passives to get away with it why let them get away with it.

Just my opinion.


reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 10:35 PM by Wotan
Originally posted by dooper
reply to post by Wotan

Wotan, I would have zero problem if being treated by a gay nurse, male or female.

Let me ask you a rhetorical question. You have a known gay, and he gets shredded by an automatic weapon. There is blood everywhere, body fluids that would gag a maggot, and tissue is shredded enough to knock a buzzard off a gut wagon.

How anxious are you going to be to dive into his blood and tissue and try to save his life? This is combat. No gloves, no mask. No shield. Life or death. Right now. Decision time.

I'd do it, but G*DD@MN him! For making me feel this uncomfortable, and then worrying about infection.


First off - I am a nurse and no I am not gay, happy yes, but gay no.

Everyone should be treated as if they have HIV anyway in a body fluids scenario in regard to blood-borne viruses and such like regardless of whether they are gay, straight, male or female.

I wouldnt even hesitate to 'dive in' and do what I could to help the poor guy. I have had far worse body fluids on my hands than blood I can tell you. My main fear in this scenario is cutting myself on any shrapnel that may be inbedded, not the actual blood.


reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 11:23 PM by Murky
Originally posted by paxnatus

Well, here it is folks, the decision that has been hotly debated to keep silent on the disclosure of gays in the military, has been overturned. Obama says in one word "yes I will end, don't ask don't tell."

I personally can't see how he can take on something so controversial at the beginning of his term. Wonder what the military has to say? We didn't become the strongest military
in the world without strict guidelines. I mean rules are in place for a reason. What does Obama know about what it takes to serve his country that he didn't learn in a text book?
Why can't he stick to the saying "if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
This man is determined to sell America out. To take the best fighting force in the world and manipulate it to fit his agenda is foolish. In my opinion he is doing everything to undermine this
country and what it stands for.

Our current economic crisis should be where his focus is. By taking on such a controversial issue even before he gets in office, he is asking to fall flat on his face. Someone needs to give the guy a wake up call.

Your thoughts on this?


I'm not an Obama fan, and not gay, either, but "don't ask, don't tell" is bulls--t. It places both the gays in the service and the military in a situation where their integrity is continually impaired. And personal integrity is the backbone of the military. If your entire life isn't characterized by honesty, you have no business in the Armed Forces - where lives may depend on how honest you are on a day-to-day basis.

"Don't ask, don't tell" forces American servicemen and their commanders to lie to each other as a policy - something which we should never encourage. Either ban gays altogether, or let them in on the same restrictions against inappropriate behavior as straight people, but don't burden the Armed Forces with the need to play games.

And regardless of whether you think two percent or ten percent of the population are gay, that's a slice of the population we can't really afford to exclude from military service without good cause. There are military specialties such as language translation in which every time we have a war, the gays who were just separated from the service for being gay are quietly approached by their former unit commanders and invited back in - because a large portion of people in that MOS in high-demand languages such as Arabic happen to be gay.

Again, it's a problem that could be solved in one of two ways - enforcing the ban as Congress intended or repealing it outright.

Now, whether or not Obama has the right to supercede Congress in this matter is a whole other question - the question Bill Clinton couldn't overcome, which caused him to come up with "don't ask, don't tell." Of course, Clinton wouldn't have understood why damage to personal integrity would have been a problem in the military - it was all stuff he had no idea about.


reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 11:30 PM by Unmask The Deception
reply to post by carewemust


Homosexuality is not a crime in the military. Stop the deception!

The problem is the the need of gay people to tell everyone. This is the single most problem that leads to gay discrimination in the military.

There is absolutely no reason for either homosexuals or heterosexuals to disclose what they prefer in the bedroom. I believe the rule should be expanded to reflect both parties.

How can soldiers work together efficiently if a soldier's religious beliefs, political beliefs, or sexual preference creates tension among the ranks? Shouldn't that energy be used to do their job better and save any tension for the battlefield?


reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 11:30 PM by dooper
reply to post by Wotan

Wotan, you have my highest respect. Nurses do things I couldn't. I've done a hard thing here and there, but you do hard things on an hourly basis.

You had a good point about the shrapnel. That's the thing. Not only shrapnel, but you've got sharp, shredded bone fragments, mixed in with tissue that looks like it went through a shredder, and sometimes a blender, and believe me, those bone fragments are sharp! Ribs aren't too bad, nor are "headbones," but arm bones, leg and pelvic bones are sharp. Bullets shatter the bone in the immediate area.

Then, if you're close enough, which has happened to me on more times than I care to recall, you get splattered and sometimes drenched with everything from lower GI contents, blood, stomach contents, bone fragments, brain matter, and $#!T that isn't even recognizable. I had half my buddies brains all over me. So much blood and gore on me by the end of the fight, the reinforcing medics thought I was shot.

Depending on terrain and level of activity, it is very common to have cuts on your hands, knees, elbows, face, and if you've been wounded a bit by light shrapnel, you're bleeding out as well. You will be wounded, and not even know it.

I just think there are a ton of jobs in the military other than in the combat arms.

To address another point by another poster, yeah. Blacks were discriminated against, but those were stupid racial divisions. It's a whole lot different among fighting men, when you're talking about homosexuality.

It's different, it's not my fault, and there is no getting around it. As I said before, civic virtues, which would of course encourage non-discrimination for any reason, are the polar opposite of military virtues.

I didn't reach around and pull this out of my nether region. It's the way it is. Dogs got fur, fish got scales, birds fly, ducks have a watertight butt, and combat men are a bit more aggressive and peculiar about who they must trust and sacrifice over. They perform deeds and have needs that most folks can never understand.

Just the way it is.


reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 11:39 PM by gimme_some_truth
Originally posted by jerico65
reply to post by HunkaHunka



And how is allowing gays in the military "supporting" us?

Glad he earned your respect by allowing gays in the service. I don't get bought off that cheaply; he has a bit more work to do before he gets mine.



Perhaps Im misreading what you are saying and I apologise if that is the case, but it seems that you dont realize that gay people are allowed in the military, even under the Dont ask dont tell law.

Gay people have been serving in the US military and the withdrawel of this rule isnt going to change that.

It was simply put into poace to prevent recruiters from asking potential recruits about their sexual preference and to help eliminate possible discrimination.

part of the law was that people in the military are not to tell that they are gay either, again to help prevent discrimination and mistreatment.

Gay people bein in the military and being allowed in the military is nothing new. Obamas removal of this law isnt going to fix it so they can finally join because they have been allowed to join the whole time....

So once again, if I misread your point I sincerly apologise. I just wanted to make double sure that you understand that gays have been in and allowed in the military the whole time.

As for his reasons for removing this law, im not sure, I will have to look into it. At first glance it seems like a odd law to remove, It seems like an open invitation to harrasment and discrimination of gays who happen to be in or join the military...

For that reason, keeping in mind that I havent read into his reasons yet, I must say I dont get why he would want to get rid of "dont ask dont tell"

It just seems like an open invitation to harrasment and discrimination of gay people in the military. I will reserve judgement however, untill I do get to read more into it, as I feel that is the only fair thing to do.

isnt it great to be american? we can feel however we want about anyone policy, regardless of who we voted for! We can be democrat and disagree with some of the democratic policies or we could be republican and disagree with some of the republican policies and its completley okay!

But I digress


reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 11:46 PM by MikeboydUS
Originally posted by Unmask The Deception
reply to post by carewemust


Homosexuality is not a crime in the military. Stop the deception!

The problem is the the need of gay people to tell everyone. This is the single most problem that leads to gay discrimination in the military.

There is absolutely no reason for either homosexuals or heterosexuals to disclose what they prefer in the bedroom. I believe the rule should be expanded to reflect both parties.

How can soldiers work together efficiently if a soldier's religious beliefs, political beliefs, or sexual preference creates tension among the ranks? Shouldn't that energy be used to do their job better and save any tension for the battlefield?


You might want to look at Article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and Department of Defense Directive 1332.4.

Article 125:
“(a) Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration, however slight, is sufficient
to complete the offense.

(b) Any person found guilty of sodomy shall by punished as a court-martial may direct.”


The DOD directive expressly forbids homosexual activity and references Article 125 of the UCMJ.



[edit on 15/1/09 by MikeboydUS]
Pages: <<  2    3    4    5    6    7    8  >>    ^^TOP^^



Russian scientists reach buried Antarctic Lake Vostok
  Posted 4 days ago with 83 member flags
Monsanto quits as GM results announced (EUROPE)
  Posted 5 days ago with 72 member flags
Strange noises reported around North Battleford
  Posted 16 days ago with 67 member flags
Ayatollah: Kill all Jews, annihilate Israel
  Posted 4 days ago with 49 member flags