U.S. Military tells Congress to keep gay ban, for now! No plan to deal with opposition in Ranks

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7bd35226eeca.jpg[/atsimg]

WASHINGTON (AP) — Senior Pentagon leaders on Friday warned Congress not to tamper with the ban on gays serving openly in the military until they can come up with a plan for dealing with potential opposition in the ranks. In a strongly worded letter obtained by The Associated Press, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen told the House Armed Services Committee that forcing policy changes on the military before it’s ready would be a mistake.

Our military must be afforded the opportunity to inform us of their concerns, insights and suggestions if we are to carry out this change successfully

Gates and Mullen wrote to the panel’s chairman, Missouri Democrat Ike Skelton

The letter provides Skelton and other unsettled Democrats political cover not to press the issue until after this year’s midterm elections. Earlier this week, Skelton asked Gates in a letter to outline his views as the House committee prepares the 2011 defense authorization bill.

Source: dailycaller.com...

What upsets me about all of this topic/debate is that Congress will do what is best for Congress. Holding off until an off-election year. No backbone at all. They need a plan that can be accepted by both sides. If the mitlitray is setting this all up by itself, with no input from Gay service members, they are just asking for failure.

I am sure many of gay men have died while serving under the flag of the USA-I just didn't know any, and would prefer it that way but I can accept a well thought-out plan of action to do what is best: Defend the USA.

I do also contend the military will drain a certain %, quckly and the US will be at it's weakest point in decades-militarily. But, in whatever many years, it will work-as long as they don't get crazy with the rule/law and too Politically Correct!

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/b43d7cc41f6f.jpg[/atsimg]

O NO, bad news for these guys They must have thought that DADT was going to be repealed.

reply to post by warisover

Oh Lord,
shock video

for those who remember the old
TV show "The A-Team" a phrase from
Mr. T comes to mind here.

"I pity the fool !!!"

I don't have any complaint about them taking the necessary time to do it right, as long as they do it. They may need time to provide separate housing, showers, etc, if that's what they decide to do. But, IMO, they should stop this ridiculous policy of discharging people who are discovered to be gay IMMEDIATELY. That would be one step that would show their intentions are honorable. I'm all for repealing DADT, but if arrangements have to be made to protect people and cover the partners of gay military, then I'm OK with it taking a little time. As long as it happens. Soon.

Congress won't listen to the military.

They will do what they feel is the best way to garner votes(much needed since they have pissed off the gays) and not care one little bit about the extra pressure this puts on the military.

Benevolent Heretic shows the mindset of not caring who is affected or how when he/she said "I'm OK with it taking a little time. As long as it happens. Soon."

Sorry to tell you but this may take a few years and if that isn't fast enough for you then I guess you can come on to ATS and let out your frustrations.

I think its better to get this new law right the first time around no matter how long it takes. That way homosexuals will finally shut their pie holes and stop whining all the time.

What this article doesn't really cover is the amoung of anticipated personnel that are said/rumored to saying the would leave the military-if the ban of Don't Ask, Don't tell is lifted.

I believe it was estimated up to 45%! Don't quote me on that-but I will try to find that piece.

Originally posted by anon72
What this article doesn't really cover is the amoung of anticipated personnel that are said/rumored to saying the would leave the military-if the ban of Don't Ask, Don't tell is lifted.

Hey, Miracle Man... Who did you say is whining? If anon is right, it sounds like about 45% of the big tough military men are big whiners if they're going to run away when the gay people come out.

Congress shouldn't listen to the military in a civil rights issue regarding a federal law.

The people in the military are supposed to be strong enough to handle themselves under very stressful conditions. They can handle being shot at while running through the venue. If they can't handle knowing that the guy next to them is gay, then they don't belong in the military. They can go home and get a job at Pizza Hut, where they don't have to know if their customers are gay or not.

I would never join the military but i would advise you people not to lift the thing about gays in teh military. I have no idea what it is like, but in life being gay creates loads of problems, so i assume in teh military it would be really bad to be open about it.

reply to post by andy1033


Exactly right andy1033, the military wouldn't be a good place for it-to be open about it. I got to thinking about what it would be like, back in the service-working with an openly gay male. Well, no biggie, really-depending on the job and if that person can preform the required task.
I do that now in my now military job. All good-I think everyone (most) can agree to that.

Then I got to thinking about the after hours, non-duty time and while looking at some photos/images to put with this story, I saw this image. (Google searched: Gays in the military):

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/23acff5dabe6.jpg[/atsimg]

The problem(s) will be in the off hours. That is when all the professionalism flys out the door. It will be some hard times on the Military as I believe all kinds of assults and other crimes against the ones that come out in the open.

Originally posted by anon72
It will be some hard times on the Military as I believe all kinds of assults and other crimes against the ones that come out in the open.

So, it's not the gay people causing the problem, is it? It's the jerks in the background (the straight guys in your photo) who think what the gay soldiers are doing is any of their business. The gays aren't the problem, The straight guys are.

Besides, isn't sex is prohibited on military bases except for married people in their quarters? These rules apply to EVERYONE.

I can't actually believe they're postponing this to ask the military about their "feelings" about it. They don't ask the soldiers how they like the food they serve or if their cots are comfy or if they want a snuggy bear to sleep with at night. They don't ask how they feel about ANYTHING else, they just order them to deal with it. And they do.

Why is this different?

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
They may need time to provide separate housing, showers, etc, if that's what they decide to do.

Oh no you don't. You can't have it both ways. You can't say that gay male soldiers and straight male soldiers are the same and then propose to put them in separate buildings.

That's JUST AS BAD as don't ask, don't tell, IMO.

Originally posted by sos37
Oh no you don't. You can't have it both ways. You can't say that gay male soldiers and straight male soldiers are the same and then propose to put them in separate buildings.

I don't make military policy. However they want to deal with having openly gay people in the military is their call. As long as they are treated equally, I don't care.

There's a difference between being treated equally and being the same. Men and women aren't the same, yet they should be treated equally.

I know what I would do if I had my way, but it's not my call.

reply to post by anon72



Too right i would never join the military, just for this reason. Once i considered the navy, but i choose not to.

If you guys think being gay in real life is tough, do not even bring it up in the military, where you are stuck in that position with alot of haters.

I would never join the military my life in the real world was hard enough, but it would be alot worse in there. Being open about this would not help those who are gay, and we know this as fact.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by sos37
Oh no you don't. You can't have it both ways. You can't say that gay male soldiers and straight male soldiers are the same and then propose to put them in separate buildings.

I don't make military policy. However they want to deal with having openly gay people in the military is their call. As long as they are treated equally, I don't care.

There's a difference between being treated equally and being the same. Men and women aren't the same, yet they should be treated equally.

I know what I would do if I had my way, but it's not my call.

It's quite simple, really. Men are men and women are women. Separate bunks for men and women and that's it. If gay men can't co-habitate with straight men without it messing up their sexual urges or getting erections in the shower or whatever else would prompt you to declare them having separate housing needs for, then gay men shouldn't be in the military.

Gays can't whine and complain that they should be treated the same as everyone else and then expect to be treated differently when it's convenient for them.

As an Army veteran, I can tell you this - the most important part of this has to do with the president. When they do away with Don't Ask, Don't Tell (which I thought was absolutely stupid to begin with) make no mistake - the commander-in-chief will have to make it clear there will be zero tolerance for abuse of gay service members. That goes from the Sec. Defense down to the most lowly private. If they make that crystal clear, and prosecute to the fullest anyone involved in harassment, things will work out.

As it is, half of the military doesn't even care (high IQ MOS's). I think areas that will be the hardest to deal with are gonna be the Infantry and Artillery (ground combat units). These are the groups that still do not allow women to serve in and have the largest concentrations of low-IQ soldiers/Marines. I hate to sound elitist, but with low IQ's come a variety of social problems/biases.

reply to post by EastCoastKid


This is the real world, do you really think that a gay bloke will bring trouble on himself by grassing on people.

How many suicides do you people have again?

Originally posted by sos37
It's quite simple, really. Men are men and women are women. Separate bunks for men and women and that's it.

I totally agree. That's how I would have it. But as I said, I don't make military policy. If they feel the need to make arrangements, then I'm all for giving them some time. That doesn't mean I agree with it. If I had my way the policy would simply be dropped. NOW.

If gay men can't co-habitate with straight men without it messing up their sexual urges or getting erections in the shower or whatever else would prompt you to declare them having separate housing needs for, then gay men shouldn't be in the military.

I didn't declare that they have separate housing needs. Did you real the source in the OP?

Gates says he supports lifting the ban but wants to survey the troops first on how it should be done. He has ordered a study by Dec. 1 that will look at whether housing arrangements would have to be altered and gay partners would be allowed military benefits.

And by the same token, if straight men feel uncomfortable showering with gay men and can't handle it, they also don't belong in the military.

Gays can't whine and complain that they should be treated the same as everyone else and then expect to be treated differently when it's convenient for them.

Maybe you shouldn't make so many assumptions. The people who are most resistant to open gays in the military are the straight men. They are the ones whining about this as far as I can see. Demanding equal rights isn't whining, just FYI.

Why would a bed room or sexual preference get “special” treatment?
That would put gays at their own level. Their own bathrooms, complete separation from themselves and others, open exploitation. I can hear calling it out now-OK guys stand here, girls here, and gays over there.
Fair and equal treatment means openness- complete openness!
It will never happen. If it did they would have to open the flood gates to all the fringe “fetishes”. People would have to be allowed multiple wives and husbands for one, animals, you name it.
It’s not going to happen if you use any common sense about it. They need to stay where they are and keep their bedroom fetishes “in the bedroom” like everyone else.
Sorry.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
...
And by the same token, if straight men feel uncomfortable showering with gay men and can't handle it, they also don't belong in the military...

Since you obviously have no freakin clue what youre talking about, let me just stick this little thought in here...

The gay agenda to normalize perversion might be fine with you in your happy liberal make believe land where you think the world should just accept you the way you are.

The military doesnt accept anybody "the way they are". They have physical and mental standards that prevent lots of well meaning folks from service. The people that do qualify spend weeks, even months depending on your MOS, getting broken down and rebuilt.

A personality flaw in a combat unit causes more damage then to any single soldier. The entire unit is effected, needlessly, by your ignorant attempt to make everything ok. It isnt ok. It shouldnt have to be OK. Why sign up to go somewhere that there is NO DOUT you are not welcome?

Wanna cause trouble?

Force Americans to accept your twisted views...the same way you refuse to accept the standards of men much greater than you.

At the end of the day BH, it's none of your business who "belongs"...

Having been in a war, myself, I can tell y'all nobody gets special treatment. And *gasp!* there were gay people serving back then, too.

Its propagandistic BS to say gay service members want special treatment; its the right to serve w/out harassment that they want. Same thing as minorities back in WW2.