DOD holds 1st LGBT pride event in Kandahar, Afghanistan

Originally posted by Char-Lee
reply to post by Domo1

 

Well for the gay members in the military and the command, obviously yes, it is important.

How about addressing the massive problem of rape in the military instead.

Could you provide some sources?

Excuse my ignorance, but I was actually unaware that rape is rampant in the military. Unless you're talking about our military raping the enemy, then I understand completely. But I thought we were talking about what happens internally within our ranks at HQ, not what happens in the literal warzone.

Originally posted by HairlessApe

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

 

Apologies, BH. I guess none of us realized that Gay Pride has been elevated to a National Holliday.

Please accept my humble apologies. I mean, if it is accepted in a war zone, then by all means, please have gay pride events held in similarly appropriate places, like funerals and brain surgeries and civil war re-enactments.

I didn't know the boys abroad weren't allowed to celebrate or identify their personal beliefs, Beezer. We'll be sure to stop sending comedians, inspirational speakers, and journalists abroad too. Because none of those things would be allowed in at a funeral or in an operating room during a brain surgery.

edit on 7-7-2013 by HairlessApe because: (no reason given)

The Army handbook reportedly instructs American soldiers in Afghanistan to avoid discussions of Islam or any other religion, debates about the war, derogatory comments about Afghans and the Taliban, advocacy of women's rights and equality, homosexuality, homosexual conduct, and pedophilia. These cautions apparently imply that troops expressing American values are to blame for "green on blue" violence that claimed the lives of 63 members of the U.S.-led coalition this year alone.

The Defense Department should investigate and take prudent steps to protect troops who, for their own protection, need to understand cultural threats. This is especially important when openly gay soldiers are deployed to regions where homosexuality often is punished with death.

cmrlink.org...

reply to post by HairlessApe


I explained my point to my satisfaction. You seem to be the one itching for a fight.

Hate to disappoint, but I'm not going to oblige you.

I've posted plenty on this site, if my views aren't already known then perhaps you can read some of my posts in the past on similar subjects.

Originally posted by Iamschist
reply to post by Char-Lee

 

I 100% agree this needs to be addressed, along with any race issues as one poster mentioned. I disagree that it is either/or. Anyone who is mentally and physically fit to serve should be celebrated and respected. They fight and die for principles in the Bill of Rights.

This is a war zone where actions cause reactions, death comes to those we love by foolishness.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


What on Earth are you talking about?

As far as I know, at least when I have been deployed (you???), sure when we came back in there was Xmas dinner or Thanksgiving eats and it was good. Yes the tax dollar paid for it and I was grateful. The only games I ever played was soccer with the Iraqi kids. It was a good release for all and helped build bridges.

However, the mission was first. Always should be. But a parade or whatever this was? Why are you sidelining the entire point?

BLUF: Do you want your military walking away from their purpose by spending time/money on every single feel good moment the MSM and DC are hyping? I say "NO". But it is a free country and you are free to disagree.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by HairlessApe

 

I explained my point to my satisfaction. You seem to be the one itching for a fight.

Hate to disappoint, but I'm not going to oblige you.

I've posted plenty on this site, if my views aren't already known then perhaps you can read some of my posts in the past on similar subjects.

You didn't answer anything in my opinion, just danced around it. But for the sake of being civil, I shall agree to end our discussion here.

Originally posted by Char-Lee
So you think the pentagon now should hold parades for personal agendas and preferences in military zones?

There is no proof that the pentagon held a 'gay pride' parade in Afghanistan. None.

Originally posted by billdadobbie
somebody needs their ass kicked for this

FOR WHAT? Have any of you actually figured out exactly what the 'gay pride event' was? No. Didn't think so. So you are saying someone needs to get their ass kicked for 'THIS" ... and you don' even know what 'THIS' is.

Originally posted by beezzer
We're talking about the Army here. Where everyone bleeds green. Where skin colour is irrelevant, where your home town is irrelevant, where your accent is irrelevant, where your upbringing is irrelevant, where your sexual orientation is irrelevant, where your gender is irrelevant, where your taste in food is irrelevant. . . . . . etc.

THAT is a good point. But at the same time .. we don't know what kind of 'event' this supposedly was. OR if it even happened. This is World Net Daily reporting. Like I said , it could have been a luncheon for the troops and a dozen people showed up. We don't know ...

Originally posted by Char-Lee

Originally posted by HairlessApe

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

 

Apologies, BH. I guess none of us realized that Gay Pride has been elevated to a National Holliday.

Please accept my humble apologies. I mean, if it is accepted in a war zone, then by all means, please have gay pride events held in similarly appropriate places, like funerals and brain surgeries and civil war re-enactments.

I didn't know the boys abroad weren't allowed to celebrate or identify their personal beliefs, Beezer. We'll be sure to stop sending comedians, inspirational speakers, and journalists abroad too. Because none of those things would be allowed in at a funeral or in an operating room during a brain surgery.

edit on 7-7-2013 by HairlessApe because: (no reason given)

The Army handbook reportedly instructs American soldiers in Afghanistan to avoid discussions of Islam or any other religion, debates about the war, derogatory comments about Afghans and the Taliban, advocacy of women's rights and equality, homosexuality, homosexual conduct, and pedophilia. These cautions apparently imply that troops expressing American values are to blame for "green on blue" violence that claimed the lives of 63 members of the U.S.-led coalition this year alone.

The Defense Department should investigate and take prudent steps to protect troops who, for their own protection, need to understand cultural threats. This is especially important when openly gay soldiers are deployed to regions where homosexuality often is punished with death.

cmrlink.org...

Right. We should tolerate that. (sarcasm) Except you forgot to mention all of this...

From the same article:

In 2002 a female A-10 pilot, Lt. Col. Martha McSally, objected to restrictions on the dress of women stationed at Prince Sultan AFB near Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Col. McSally (an unsuccessful candidate for Congress in 2012) made international news when she protested a requirement that American military women stationed there had to wear the head-covering abayas and be accompanied by men in the back seat of vehicles when traveling off-base. McSally had a point −American women, especially Christians and Jews, should not have to wear abayas while serving overseas. But spokesmen for the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) did a poor job explaining reasons why cultural differences in the Middle East require force protection measures to save lives. In Saudi Arabia, misogynist "religious police" often imprisoned and sometimes killed women seen in public wearing insufficiently modest dress.

There was no Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) to protect the legal rights of Americans taken into custody by Saudi authorities. Col. McSally nevertheless filed a lawsuit and successfully pushed Congress to pass legislation forbidding commanders from ordering women to wear abayas.

The House heeded these warnings and did not approve an abaya amendment to the annual defense bill. But then-Rep. Heather Wilson (R-AZ) joined with feminist Rep. Caroline Maloney (D-NY) to sponsor a free-standing abaya bill that passed the House on a voice vote. The Senate passed similar legislation on a 93-0 vote.

Misogyny and sexual brutality in Muslim countries is offensive to western sensibilities, but withholding information will not solve that problem. Our soldiers, including women, are respected in Afghanistan, but cultural threats are real and extremely dangerous. Life-saving information should not be denied or confused with subservience to Middle Eastern customs and attitudes that put unknowing troops at risk.

cmrlink.org... ary_pc_and_jihadist_cultural_threats

We're cool with protecting women's rights despite the enemy's beliefs, so long as they're not gay women.

It cracks me up that something as trivial as this event can spin up so many people. I would bet my paycheck that as one member put it, It was nothing more than a meal and some non-alcholic drinks together. And the local PAO decided that they had nothing better to do, so they showed up when invited because, you know they were.

This is a non-story as far as I am concerned, I got more spun up over the Salsa dance classes that were held on the COBs for the Fobbits. I thought we were there to conduct missions, not learn to dance.

But them again, bored troops have a tendency to do stupid things if you don't try to keep them busy doing something...even dance classes. . Though I am sure that some of the spouses enjoyed it when they got home.

Originally posted by HairlessApe

Originally posted by Char-Lee

Originally posted by HairlessApe

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

 

Apologies, BH. I guess none of us realized that Gay Pride has been elevated to a National Holliday.

Please accept my humble apologies. I mean, if it is accepted in a war zone, then by all means, please have gay pride events held in similarly appropriate places, like funerals and brain surgeries and civil war re-enactments.

I didn't know the boys abroad weren't allowed to celebrate or identify their personal beliefs, Beezer. We'll be sure to stop sending comedians, inspirational speakers, and journalists abroad too. Because none of those things would be allowed in at a funeral or in an operating room during a brain surgery.

edit on 7-7-2013 by HairlessApe because: (no reason given)

The Army handbook reportedly instructs American soldiers in Afghanistan to avoid discussions of Islam or any other religion, debates about the war, derogatory comments about Afghans and the Taliban, advocacy of women's rights and equality, homosexuality, homosexual conduct, and pedophilia. These cautions apparently imply that troops expressing American values are to blame for "green on blue" violence that claimed the lives of 63 members of the U.S.-led coalition this year alone.

The Defense Department should investigate and take prudent steps to protect troops who, for their own protection, need to understand cultural threats. This is especially important when openly gay soldiers are deployed to regions where homosexuality often is punished with death.

cmrlink.org...

Right. We should tolerate that. (sarcasm) Except you forgot to mention all of this...

From the same article:

In 2002 a female A-10 pilot, Lt. Col. Martha McSally, objected to restrictions on the dress of women stationed at Prince Sultan AFB near Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Col. McSally (an unsuccessful candidate for Congress in 2012) made international news when she protested a requirement that American military women stationed there had to wear the head-covering abayas and be accompanied by men in the back seat of vehicles when traveling off-base. McSally had a point −American women, especially Christians and Jews, should not have to wear abayas while serving overseas. But spokesmen for the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) did a poor job explaining reasons why cultural differences in the Middle East require force protection measures to save lives. In Saudi Arabia, misogynist "religious police" often imprisoned and sometimes killed women seen in public wearing insufficiently modest dress.

There was no Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) to protect the legal rights of Americans taken into custody by Saudi authorities. Col. McSally nevertheless filed a lawsuit and successfully pushed Congress to pass legislation forbidding commanders from ordering women to wear abayas.

The House heeded these warnings and did not approve an abaya amendment to the annual defense bill. But then-Rep. Heather Wilson (R-AZ) joined with feminist Rep. Caroline Maloney (D-NY) to sponsor a free-standing abaya bill that passed the House on a voice vote. The Senate passed similar legislation on a 93-0 vote.

Misogyny and sexual brutality in Muslim countries is offensive to western sensibilities, but withholding information will not solve that problem. Our soldiers, including women, are respected in Afghanistan, but cultural threats are real and extremely dangerous. Life-saving information should not be denied or confused with subservience to Middle Eastern customs and attitudes that put unknowing troops at risk.

cmrlink.org... ary_pc_and_jihadist_cultural_threats

We're cool with protecting women's rights despite the enemy's beliefs, so long as they're not gay women.

Maybe we should respect the troop's opinions?

Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey said, "[A]s horrific as this tragedy was, if our diversity becomes a casualty, I think that’s worse.”

reply to post by FlyersFan


Well, it was WND reporting, but the video is from a DoD.mil website. So there is some credibilty there. But however, like you say. It was a event, not a parade.

Gawd I hate the media at times.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


Awesome. As long as there are religious extremists killing people for being different, I think there should be objectionable taboos thrown in their faces every freakin' minute of the day.

Topless women, gay people, kids with self esteem, people of different faiths, etc.

In fact, this is just about the only thing our military has done over there that I approve of.

I realize there is a middle ground and that I sound a bit glib but this is a refreshing change from drone strikes. But, for all I know, they used drones to fire rainbows for the event.

Originally posted by HairlessApe

Originally posted by Char-Lee
reply to post by Domo1

 

Well for the gay members in the military and the command, obviously yes, it is important.

How about addressing the massive problem of rape in the military instead.

John McCain has come up with a novel solution to the alleged sexual assault crisis in the military: women should not join the military.

www.the-spearhead.com...

Yes well just as many men are rped in the military it seems.

Could you provide some sources?
thefeministwire.com...
www.pbs.org...

It has been in mainstream news a lot lately
.

Excuse my ignorance, but I was actually unaware that rape is rampant in the military. Unless you're talking about our military raping the enemy, then I understand completely. But I thought we were talking about what happens internally within our ranks at HQ, not what happens in the literal warzone.

reply to post by Cuervo


I agree. The world needs to look around and see that there is more to it than just their puny god.



The West dragged China kicking and screaming into the 20th century. I think that this is the way that the Taliban will be marginilized.

Originally posted by Char-Lee

Originally posted by HairlessApe

Originally posted by Char-Lee
reply to post by Domo1

 

Well for the gay members in the military and the command, obviously yes, it is important.

How about addressing the massive problem of rape in the military instead.

John McCain has come up with a novel solution to the alleged sexual assault crisis in the military: women should not join the military.

www.the-spearhead.com...

Yes well just as many men are rped in the military it seems.

Could you provide some sources?
thefeministwire.com...
www.pbs.org...

It has been in mainstream news a lot lately
.

Excuse my ignorance, but I was actually unaware that rape is rampant in the military. Unless you're talking about our military raping the enemy, then I understand completely. But I thought we were talking about what happens internally within our ranks at HQ, not what happens in the literal warzone.

While any sexual assault is too much sexual assault, an average of 22,000/year is pretty low in the military. Considering the total amount of people currently serving is 2,271,475 (according to wiki) that's less than 1%.

And actually, your numbers are loaded. Those aren't the numbers "per year" as the chart seems to insinuate. They're totals. Not to mention the fact that the chart ONLY addresses the ratio of men to women who claim sexual assault. That's almost completely worthless information, especially when you take into account the fact that the ratio of men and women in the military is not equal.

Also, there's a big problem with fake sexual assault claims in the military currently:

False complaints of sexual abuse in the military are rising at a faster rate than overall reports of sexual assault, a trend that could harm combat readiness, analysts say. Virtually all media attention on a Pentagon report last week focused on an increase in service members’ claims of sexual abuse in an anonymous survey, but unmentioned were statistics showing that a significant percentage of such actually investigated cases were baseless.

From 2009 to 2012, the number of sexual abuse reports rose from 3,244 to 3,374 — a 4 percent increase. During the same period, the number of what the Pentagon calls “unfounded allegations” based on completed investigations of those reports rose from 331 to 444 — a 35 percent increase. In 2012, there were 2,661 completed investigations, meaning that the 444 false complaints accounted for about 17 percent of all closed cases last year. False reports accounted for about 13 percent of closed cases in 2009.

Also, the reported "sexual assault" can include things like "suggestive images" or partial nudity which is utter BS.

found 631 instances of pornography (magazines, calendars, pictures, videos that intentionally displayed nudity or depicted acts of sexual activity); 3,987 instances of unprofessional material (discrimination, professional appearance, items specific to local military history such as patches, coins, heritage rooms, log books, song books, etc.); and 27,598 instances of inappropriate or offensive items (suggestive items, magazines, posters, pictures, calendars, vulgarity, graffiti). In total, 32,216 items were reported. Identified items were documented and either removed or destroyed.”

Washington Times

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


So why is it that we don't do all the same for consenting adults who wish to have multiple marriage partners. Why are bigamists still unlawful and why can't they have military celebrations and parades because they are discriminated against.

reply to post by HairlessApe

While any sexual assault is too much sexual assault, an average of 22,000/year is pretty low in the military. Considering the total amount of people currently serving is 2,271,475 (according to wiki) that's less than 1%.

nd actually, your numbers are loaded

I have no numbers you ask for sources (how about thanks) I grabbed a few for YOU the military have been discussing their disgraceful numbers in the news and what to do about it....this has nothing to do with me

unlike so many here my only agenda is not wanting my son getting killed because uprising are caused by throwing irritations at the populace in Afghanistan. How foolish just for anyone's sense of "sexual pride".

The objective of the military is to complete the mission, to KILL, to DESTROY the ENEMY! It is the ultimate tool in which a country uses to resolve political ends. It doesn't matter if the warriors are gay or strait, we complete the mission first, not celebrate on the verge of failure. Save the celebration for the States. You don't see the Russians or Chinese do such nonsense. Our first and only priority is to complete the mission and KILL THE ENEMY...PERIOD!

Originally posted by Char-Lee
reply to post by sk0rpi0n

 

So why is it that we don't do all the same for consenting adults who wish to have multiple marriage partners. Why are bigamists still unlawful and why can't they have military celebrations and parades because they are discriminated against.

Because you can't take a gene out of a rat and turn it into a polygamist.

Originally posted by HairlessApe

Originally posted by Char-Lee
reply to post by sk0rpi0n

 

So why is it that we don't do all the same for consenting adults who wish to have multiple marriage partners. Why are bigamists still unlawful and why can't they have military celebrations and parades because they are discriminated against.

Because you can't take a gene out of a rat and turn it into a polygamist.

Lol! So the persons who prefer their own sex need to be genetically different for it to be ok...I see. How do we know there is not a multi partner preference gene anyway! there seems to be a gene that can change anything in the human body and behavior including the exclusive drive to prefer children as sex interests.