Officer won't sign order for troop pro-homosexual indoctrination

reply to post by bluemirage5

I could care less what the soldier next to me has as a sexual preference. In combat there are only two things that matter: your mission and everyone getting back alive and not necessarily in that order. You have to respect a person for who they are and hope they do the same. It shouldn't make a bit of difference. They are there to do a job they volunteered for.

reply to post by TKDRL


I agree. At the work place is shows a blatant lack of respect when someone flaunts their sexuality around in a disgusting way. Be it male or female, gay or straight. What is private and intimate is private and intimate. What a heterosexual will do, a homosexual will do.

reply to post by arbitrarygeneraiist


Correct, If I talked about me and my wifes sex life at work, I would be written up. If I were to kiss her in public when in uniform, I would get in trouble. So to say that gays would go around butt humpin and rug munchin in the Exchange is just stupid.

reply to post by ipsedixit
We didn't lose the wars, our dumb ass leaders did by restricting us with their rules of engagement and abandoning positions that we sometimes fought weeks to take. When you give up the ground you've gained and lost friends and fellow soldiers to take it, how would you feel towards your leadership?

reply to post by yrwehere1


I'd feel the same about them as when they got the troops into the war to begin with.

Originally posted by Flighty
I think the women in this thread who are having a problem seeing why straight men have a problem with this, should campaign to have all military members, regardless of gender or sexuality, shower together.
That's fair and equal for everyone. Problem solved.

And what of the straight men in this thread that dont have a problem with this. What would you have us do?

It's rapidly apparent that the scope of a front line combat soldier is beyond the basic grasp of several on this thread who have taken offense at anything beyond what their personal experience and wishes encompass.

When I think of front line combat troops, the Air Force doesn't exactly jump out at me, with one exception - Combat Controllers. Who are attached to Army combat units.

You go right ahead and think what you wish. It doesn't matter what your opinion is. The only thing that matters is those guys in combat mode day in and day out. They only have each other to rely on, they must completely trust each other, and individuals perceived as "different" will NOT be accepted, and will be gotten rid of - one way or another.

We've all seen incidents in civilian life of guys "rolling queers" and even murdering them.

Just wait until you put rifles and grenades in the hands of everyone, with testosterone flowing, stress that will linger in diminishing quantities for decades, and a desire to stay alive at any cost.

You don't think of what should be, or what could be. Your only thought is of surviving your individual fights before being forced into another.

Like I said, a known gay being shot and bleeding all over everything is a threat - real or perceived.

NOT something the other team members wish to be exposed to - even potentially.

In combat, all threats are removed as a matter of habit.

Political correctness be damned.

Originally posted by yrwehere1
reply to post by ipsedixit

 

We didn't lose the wars, our dumb ass leaders did by restricting us with their rules of engagement and abandoning positions that we sometimes fought weeks to take. When you give up the ground you've gained and lost friends and fellow soldiers to take it, how would you feel towards your leadership?

Well that is the american way. We are the troops who ultimately take orders from a civilian in charge. Keeps us in line haveing someone accountable to the people in charge, no matter how silly it is from a pure military view point. What is the line
"Forward, the Light Brigade!"
Was there a man dismay'd?
Not tho' the soldier knew
Some one had blunder'd.
Theirs not to make reply,
Theirs not to reason why,
Theirs but to do and die.
Into the valley of Death
Rode the six hundred."?

reply to post by yrwehere1

I apologize. I respect the US military and realize how politicians have misused it since Vietnam. But the fantasist in me can't resist the thought of a special gay Delta Force unit, for desert operations, operating behind enemy lines, seeking out some of those a*holes who beheaded hostages and caturing them and then BF'ing them into the middle of next week and filming it and then broadcasting it on a special US Army TV station, All Queera.

The US needs to get the lead out and do something about those boys and a gay unit would be the perfect weapon.

Maybe I'm ahead of the curve on this one.

Originally posted by FarArcher
It's rapidly apparent that the scope of a front line combat soldier is beyond the basic grasp of several on this thread who have taken offense at anything beyond what their personal experience and wishes encompass.

When I think of front line combat troops, the Air Force doesn't exactly jump out at me, with one exception - Combat Controllers. Who are attached to Army combat units.

You go right ahead and think what you wish. It doesn't matter what your opinion is. The only thing that matters is those guys in combat mode day in and day out. They only have each other to rely on, they must completely trust each other, and individuals perceived as "different" will NOT be accepted, and will be gotten rid of - one way or another.

We've all seen incidents in civilian life of guys "rolling queers" and even murdering them.

Just wait until you put rifles and grenades in the hands of everyone, with testosterone flowing, stress that will linger in diminishing quantities for decades, and a desire to stay alive at any cost.

You don't think of what should be, or what could be. Your only thought is of surviving your individual fights before being forced into another.

Like I said, a known gay being shot and bleeding all over everything is a threat - real or perceived.

NOT something the other team members wish to be exposed to - even potentially.

In combat, all threats are removed as a matter of habit.

Political correctness be damned.

If our troops are to be thought of in the same ilk as some redneck who 'rolls queers', we have a far larger problem at hand than just gays in the military.

Course, anyone who is even half-educated wouldnt think of a gay persons blood as any more of a threat than a straight person, but hey, we do recruit the bottom 10% of our graduating classes, so you may just be right.

reply to post by FarArcher


The threats that need to be eliminated from the battlefield are those that would willingly murder or sacrifice one of their own brother-in-arms because of a trivial difference. That is disgusting.

Originally posted by Brood

Originally posted by RUFFREADY
I don't think the troops need a lot of grab assing going on.

When I was in the service we did not have to worry about gays bugging us.

Its not good.

We need people that will kill the enemy, not check out their butts.

Straight men are ugly.

Get over yourself, and get back to work, Private.

Just because you're perverted and couldn't work if there were boobs around doesn't mean that gay people are the same way.

More of the straight soldiers probably look at eachothers butts than the gay ones. Gay people have standards and furry bottoms with skid marks usually don't fall into those standards.

edit on 28-12-2010 by Brood because: (no reason given)

Ugly to whom - a gay guy? I doubt any straight guy really values your opinion on matters such as these.

You think a guy being attracted to boobs makes him perverted? Stupid much?

You think straight guys 'look at each others butts more than gays" - Now you have proven yourself to be stupid - wheres the logic in such a idiotic statement?

"Usually don't fall into those standards" I guess that means sometimes they do! You're pretty gross aren't you!

When you say "gay people have standards" - are you implying straight people do not?

reply to post by CayceFan


He's implying that gay people in the military aren't a threat.

reply to post by FarArcher


Oh excuse ole' humble me, The 7.62 rounds impacting my position must have been from the back line then? Guess what, when you fight people who know that land, everywhere is the front line. And dont be an ass hat. Us poor stupid troopers know quite a bit more about the current political under pinnings of this event then you think. After all we are charged with quite a bit of responsiblility with you think about it. Further more, as far as any reasonable US troop is concerned, people who shoot at us are threats. Not some dude who happends to like to cuddle with his boy friend who is also gay. If you are not gay then this policy has nothing to do with you. If you are gay, it simiply effects one subject of conversation. Like I said before, seems like Much Ado About Nothing from the MSM and loud opinionated civilians who declare the need for more and more security personel and then want to nit pick about that the arabic speakers do in the off time afforded to them.

reply to post by captaintyinknots

Uhm, rednecks as you call them who've assaulted and robbed queers are from every corner of the nation, from every social strata, and every educational background.

Education is not to be equated with enlightenment.

I've seen some highly educated dumbasses.

reply to post by FarArcher


Dude, get over yourself. You aren't that big of a deal. IF you are a member of the military, you will have been given an order. Shut up and soldier.

If you feel your own desires, fears and prejudices are more important than the orders you have received, PLEASE get out! We don't want you carrying a weapon in our name. There is nothing more dangerous than a soldier who feels they are above taking orders.

Just my opinion, others may differ.

Peace,
Montana

www.youtube.com..." target="_blank" class="postlink">www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by Sinnthia
This has nothing to do with patriotism or majority rule. The bible is written as is. You do not vote regularly on which pages to ignore and which to give special attention. It says what it says. I am not anti-military. But if you want to cry about your Jesus, do not have the job of killer. It takes all the wind out of your sails.

Uh, you DO know the definition of a democracy, do you not? Majority most certainly DOES rule.

Ezekiel 13:19
You have profaned me among my people for a few handfuls of barley and scraps of bread. By lying to my people, who listen to lies, you have killed those who should not have died and have spared those who should not live.

Clearly, the Bible makes a distinction between two types of people. The fact that you believe there is no distinction between murderers and the law of justice, is mind-boggling. A nation's armies are an extension of the law. They are not given free reign to kill willy-nilly, and to do so makes them accountable for their actions. They seek out those monsters who DO kill innocent people. Why is this such a hard concept to grasp?

Your Jesus and your bible say killing perfect strangers is ok? I say you are lying and confusing yourself in the process. This is about the man in the OP and his bible. I read his bible. His bible says killing is bad.

"Our" Jesus only makes the distinction between two types of people. But justice is a very big thing in the Bible, to the degree that even if an animal kills a person, it is to be put to death. We have no problem doing that apparently, (except for the animal right's groups), but we're suppose to let the human versions of serial killers run loose blowing themselves up, along with everything else they can get their hands on? Some of these monsters out there would love to saw your head off with a dull knife and hang in the street for everyone to gawk at. I highly doubt that your cushy lifestyle and spoiled opinions would be easy to keep if you had to live in such an environment day in and day out....I dare say that if given a choice, you'd be happy to see Marines show up on your doorstep to save your life and the lives of your children.

Welcome to the Twilight Zone, where good is perceived to be evil and evil is perceived to be good....oh, but wait, the Bible mentioned that too...

Isaiah 5:20
Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.

Given that my stance is more in line with Biblical morals, given the homosexual debate, I think it's safe to assume which category I'm in here. "Homosexuality is GOOD! Bible is EVIL!" *insert sarcasm for anyone who didn't pick up on that* Moral insanity, anyone?

As for this guard commader, oh no! A weekend warrior has an opinion. He will most likely be asked to retire due to this, and someone will step up and carry out the order. This is infact a lawful order so he has no legal right to refuse to folow it. How can you expect a man to follow an order in combat if he cannot carry out a non combat order? It is a simple training task, no one is asking any one in the militaty to be gay. I suppose some of you would be upset if you knew that you may not be part of a hate group, nor may you display the confedrate flag when in the service.

Originally posted by FarArcher
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

Uhm, rednecks as you call them who've assaulted and robbed queers are from every corner of the nation, from every social strata, and every educational background.

Education is not to be equated with enlightenment.

I've seen some highly educated dumbasses.

You missed the point, but thats ok.