Marine Corps chief: I don’t want my men losing any limbs if we repeal DADT

posted at 9:34 pm on December 14, 2010 by Allahpundit

In fairness, fully 60 percent of Marines deployed in combat zones think performance would be negatively affected by letting gays serve openly. Amos’s point, I take it, is that under those circumstances any added distraction — doesn’t matter what it is — is capable of getting someone killed. I understand his concern, but he seems to have no theory of how the distraction might work in practice; beyond that, it’s hard to fathom how the most famously tough-minded troops in the world, the tip of the American spear, would be so thrown by serving alongside an occasional gay solider that it might lead to one of them getting his legs blown off. Marines cope daily with the “distraction” of seeing their best friends shot to pieces, and yet … this is going to bother them to the point of absent-minded recklessness?

“Mistakes and inattention or distractions cost Marines lives,” he said on Tuesday, explaining how he came to his decision. “That’s the currency of this fight.

“I don’t want to lose any Marines to the distraction. I don’t want to have any Marines that I’m visiting at Bethesda [National Naval Medical Center, in Maryland] with no legs be the result of any type of distraction.”…

When pressed to explain exactly what a breakdown of “unit cohesion” could look like and why it would endanger Marines in combat, or the larger war effort, Amos said he was unsure but that the significant concern of breakdown was good enough for him.

“I can’t explain what the expectations are. I can’t explain what they think might happen,” Amos said…

But with so many Marines engaged in Afghanistan, he thought about what could happen to small units like those in Sangin, where fighting is the heaviest by many accounts. When a firefight breaks out, he said, lives depend on “intuitive behavior” free from distraction.

“Intuitive behavior” is an issue in combat situations, but U.S. allies manage to do fine with gay troops and, again, Amos seems to have no theory of how troops’ intuition might be affected. Is he suggesting that gay soldiers wouldn’t rush to the aid of a wounded straight comrade, or vice versa? If the objection is that a RINO civvie like me can’t possibly understand, well, plenty of milbloggers have been on record for awhile now in favor of repealing DADT. I assume not a single one of them would take that position if they thought it would seriously risk American lives. And in fact, according to the Pentagon survey, 84 percent of Marines (overall, not just combat troops) who’ve worked with someone gay said it hadn’t affected unit morale.

Just as I’m writing this, ABC is out with a new poll finding that 77 percent of the public supports letting gay troops serve openly. I haven’t gotten here into the question of gays’ right to serve versus the military’s interest in unit readiness (Gates’s big worry is that that question will end up being decided by courts instead of Congress), but here’s an interesting data point from the American Prospect from the last time the military was grappling with questions about integration. It’s an imperfect analogy, obviously, but the Pentagon did survey troops — including “combat crews” — in 1945 about how they’d feel training in racially mixed units. Turns out that was quite a distraction at the time, too.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Yes, but I’m a retired O-15. I was an 8 Star General back at Chicken Pat Thai and demand that you call me Sir.

Kaisersoze on December 15, 2010 at 1:09 AM

You are an O-15? Can I laugh and call you a fool instead?

F15Mech on December 15, 2010 at 1:18 AM

So you really think we are bigots now too.

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 1:15 AM

We’re all “bigots”, but we won’t quit the military even if the homosexual agenda is shoved down our throats.

Can’t square that circle.

Rebar on December 15, 2010 at 1:20 AM

Iraq and Afganistan, among other locales. That’s about all you’ll get from me on that topic.

dakine on December 15, 2010 at 1:16 AM

I’ll throw in El Salvador and South America on top of yours. Does my opinion matter more now? Or do I have to prove I was engaged in more combat while I was in OIF and OEF than you. Just those two alone account for nearly five years of my life out of the last decade in “real” combat. He11, my little detachment in just my last deployment can take claim to over 70 deliberate operations and more than 300 EKIA. But I’m wrong, a bigot and my opinion doesn’t matter?

Maybe we should go by who’s more highly decorated?

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 1:23 AM

Please spare us the nonsense. You offer us a Huffington Post article about how other nations ‘manaqe to do fine’ with open homosexuality. The three nations cited are Britain, Australia, and Israel.

DaMav on December 15, 2010 at 1:10 AM

It isn’t just that but the European nations cited didn’t actually allow homosexuals to serve until around 2000. Israel allowed them in 1993 and as you point out did rather poorly in Lebanon. The jury is still out on whether the experiment will work or not and that includes in the European nations. The Netherlands is the only military with a long standing policy of allowing homosexual service that has seen combat.

sharrukin on December 15, 2010 at 1:23 AM

dakine, is this guy a bigot? He doesn’t seem to mind gays, but he’s against Muslims. So, he’s okay in your book?

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 1:18 AM

Well Hawk, it’s not that I necessarily don’t mind mosquitoes, it’s just that alligators concern me a whole lot more. I would rather have some guy eying my skinny arse than having a gun and yelling ALLAH AKBAR!!!

Luka on December 15, 2010 at 1:23 AM

One might think this thread is a gay hookup spot with all the men here whipping out their cocks to see whose is bigger.

Logboy on December 15, 2010 at 1:25 AM

We’re all “bigots”, but we won’t quit the military even if the homosexual agenda is shoved down our throats.

Can’t square that circle.

Rebar on December 15, 2010 at 1:20 AM

Do you seriously think that huge quantities of gays are joining the service to advance the “homosexual agenda”? Seriously? What is the “homosexual agenda”? DADT is a fiction. 5 years from now we’ll look back on this whole thing and wonder WTF the big deal was.

dakine on December 15, 2010 at 1:26 AM

OK, a soldier calls another soldier a faggot(even in jest), and gets suspended because a gay soldier takes offense and files a complaint. It’ll never happen, right?

mossberg500 on December 14, 2010 at 11:29 PM

You are correct. It will happen.

The problem is AP’s libertarianism is merely a form of liberalism. I know that will piss off some of you, but I really think they are two sides of the same coin.

scotash on December 15, 2010 at 1:26 AM

F15Mech on December 15, 2010 at 1:18 AM

Son (or Miss) I’m glad you stood your ground tonight. I’m proud of you whatever capacity you’re serving in.

The coming changes for you young folks in the military are going to be difficult. The only advice I would give you is hold you head up and don’t forget who you are. Never let anyone make you feel like it’s you who are the problem, or that you’re the one who needs to change.

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 1:27 AM

Yes, but I’m a retired O-15. I was an 8 Star General back at Chicken Pat Thai and demand that you call me Sir.

Kaisersoze on December 15, 2010 at 1:09 AM

You are an O-15? Can I laugh and call you a fool instead?

F15Mech on December 15, 2010 at 1:18 AM

That doesn’t impress me in the least. I was an O-25 in the Union Army and an O-26 in the Confederate Air Force. Both General Grant and General Lee awarded me the Congressional Medal of Honor.

Luka on December 15, 2010 at 1:28 AM

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 1:23 AM

Good, patriotic people can have bigoted opinions in specific areas. Have you had specific experiences where an openly gay service member damaged combat readiness? Why is this such a big issue for you? Were you ever really concerned that a gay guy in one of your units wanted to bugger you?

dakine on December 15, 2010 at 1:29 AM

The coming changes for you young folks in the military are going to be difficult. The only advice I would give you is hold you head up and don’t forget who you are. Never let anyone make you feel like it’s you who are the problem, or that you’re the one who needs to change.

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 1:27 AM

I imagine similar advice was given prior to Truman integrating the military and allowing “Negroes” to serve in combat alongside whites.

dakine on December 15, 2010 at 1:32 AM

Luka on December 15, 2010 at 1:23 AM

I’ve served with Muslims. It doesn’t mean they’re terrorists. That’s all I was saying. I’ve carried their bodies in my helicopter as a matter of fact after they’ve died fighting next to our Special Forces soldiers in Afghanistan.

But really, what makes you think Amos wouldn’t be alert to extremists of any type? Was there something in his words specifically about Muslims?

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 1:33 AM

Do you seriously think that huge quantities of gays are joining the service to advance the “homosexual agenda”?

dakine on December 15, 2010 at 1:26 AM

I think a whole lot of gays who were not, nor ever will be, in the service are pushing for a repeal of DADT to serve their agenda.

And I specifically stated that gays will certainly not join in any quantity if in fact DADT is repealed, not even minutely replacing those who will quit – thus the necessity of a new draft.

Rebar on December 15, 2010 at 1:33 AM

You are an O-15? Can I laugh and call you a fool instead?

F15Mech on December 15, 2010 at 1:18 AM

Well, if I had been in the Navy….

And I was joking if it didn’t come across, I was making fun of our friend here. I don’t know if he is BS’ing, but my warning light is flashing.

Kaisersoze on December 15, 2010 at 1:34 AM

Were you ever really concerned that a gay guy in one of your units wanted to bugger you?

dakine on December 15, 2010 at 1:29 AM

Why do you always have to frame the argument as if this were the crux of it. Is it easier for you to explain away all the discussion with a cartoonish oversimplification like this…all the time!

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 1:34 AM

I used to have a state of the art weapon system but I can’t get anyone to competently handle it these days… gay or straight!

I kid, I kid…

Kaisersoze on December 15, 2010 at 12:48 AM

That sounds like a personal problem.

Just saying :)

F15Mech on December 15, 2010 at 1:35 AM

Both General Grant and General Lee awarded me the Congressional Medal of Honor.

Luka on December 15, 2010 at 1:28 AM

Pfffttt. Only one from each??

Kaisersoze on December 15, 2010 at 1:35 AM

Kaisersoze on December 15, 2010 at 1:34 AM

My bad I get it now.

F15Mech on December 15, 2010 at 1:36 AM

The coming changes for you young folks in the military are going to be difficult. The only advice I would give you is hold you head up and don’t forget who you are. Never let anyone make you feel like it’s you who are the problem, or that you’re the one who needs to change.

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 1:27 AM

I imagine that similar sentiments were expressed prior to Truman integrating the military prior to WWII.

dakine on December 15, 2010 at 1:36 AM

Why do you always have to frame the argument as if this were the crux of it. Is it easier for you to explain away all the discussion with a cartoonish oversimplification like this…all the time!

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 1:34 AM

What’s the issue then? I assume that you served with troops you and everybody else knew were gay?

dakine on December 15, 2010 at 1:38 AM

But really, what makes you think Amos wouldn’t be alert to extremists of any type? Was there something in his words specifically about Muslims?

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 1:33 AM

It was the lack of words about muslims and it’s the followers of the Koran, not ‘extremists’. I have yet to hear one General even be able to get out the word – Islam, Mohammad, Hadith, etc.

Luka on December 15, 2010 at 1:39 AM

Iraq and Afganistan, among other locales. That’s about all you’ll get from me on that topic.

dakine on December 15, 2010 at 1:16 AM

Still a dodgy answer. If you served 30 years you were in for at least 20 years before OIF, where were you downrange before that? If you were SOF from 1980 to 2000, you had to have to done something in those 20 years.

Kaisersoze on December 15, 2010 at 1:39 AM

I imagine that similar sentiments were expressed prior to Truman integrating the military prior to WWII.

dakine on December 15, 2010 at 1:36 AM

I think most Blacks would resent that remark and call you a racist.

Luka on December 15, 2010 at 1:40 AM

My bad I get it now.

F15Mech on December 15, 2010 at 1:36 AM

And for the record, there was never a hot LZ in Vietnam named “Chicken Pat Thai”. It was what I had for lunch today though.

Kaisersoze on December 15, 2010 at 1:41 AM

Is it just me or is the thread full of Air Force personnel and Officers? Its like a bad night at the all ranks club.

Logboy on December 15, 2010 at 1:42 AM

I imagine that similar sentiments were expressed prior to Truman integrating the military prior to WWII.

dakine on December 15, 2010 at 1:36 AM

I think most Blacks would resent that remark and call you a racist.

Luka on December 15, 2010 at 1:40 AM

Dont fool yourself. I witnessed units in the Georgia National Guard who were, for the most part, segregated (in Iraq). Sadly, the civil war is alive and well for some southerners.

Logboy on December 15, 2010 at 1:44 AM

dakine on December 15, 2010 at 1:29 AM

I don’t think I’ve formed my opinion by these occurances, but since you asked (Have you had specific experiences where an openly gay service member damaged combat readiness?)

We have had instances on every deployment since I’ve been in the 82ND CAB. I was absorbed into that organization in 06 from the 1-159th and have done 2 OEF tours with them. In the first, the Air Assault Battalion Commander in Kandahar was relieved for possessing child and gay porn on his work computer. His partner from stateside alerted CID to him after he learned the Colonel was having an affair with an enlisted man in theater. (Several smaller instances and a couple soldiers claiming to be gay were sent home) OEF 10/11 was the worst. A gay LT was sexually harassing an enlisted man who was working in the Brigade Commander’s office as his duty driver. The young soldier was married and threatened to kill the LT. After the soldier complaimed about the LT, it was discovered the Support Battalion had suppressed a complain by a young warrant officer that the LT had made advances to him in The South Park showers.

But, I have been asked and written about these incidents before on Hot AIr.

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 1:46 AM

Kaisersoze on December 15, 2010 at 1:39 AM

Your math is messed up and you read my prior post incorrectly. Doesn’t do us much good to measure d*ck sizes and resumes on the internet though anyway, does it?

dakine on December 15, 2010 at 1:48 AM

Pfffttt. Only one from each??

Kaisersoze on December 15, 2010 at 1:35 AM

I only entered that war toward the end when I was 13. If it had gone on longer, I would have got a whole lot more, I am sure.

Luka on December 15, 2010 at 1:49 AM

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 1:46 AM

Fair enough I guess. In my experience, however, these sorts of incidents occur gay or straight, and would occur DADT or no DADT. Human nature in other words.

dakine on December 15, 2010 at 1:51 AM

Your math is messed up and you read my prior post incorrectly. Doesn’t do us much good to measure d*ck sizes and resumes on the internet though anyway, does it?

dakine on December 15, 2010 at 1:48 AM

Then fill me in, hero. You said you recently retired with 30 years of service as an O-6. My watch says its 2010 and my spidey sense is tingling that you are full of sh*t. Feel free to prove me wrong, though I doubt you will.

Kaisersoze on December 15, 2010 at 1:52 AM

I imagine that similar sentiments were expressed prior to Truman integrating the military prior to WWII.

dakine on December 15, 2010 at 1:36 AM

Geez, I’m anti-black now too? Please, don’t tell my best friend Pierre, the guy I asked to do my last Army flight with. That’s a big honor if you don’t know.

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 1:52 AM

A gay LT was sexually harassing an enlisted man who was working in the Brigade Commander’s office as his duty driver.

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 1:46 AM

Didn’t the gay LT know how to drive himself? That’s a very low rank to have a driver. Or did you mean the Brigade Commander’s driver?

Luka on December 15, 2010 at 1:53 AM

Son (or Miss) I’m glad you stood your ground tonight. I’m proud of you whatever capacity you’re serving in.

Thanks hawkdriver I am a male vet and your words actually means a-lot to this male USAF VET (Congrats on your “flying award”)TW :)

The coming changes for you young folks in the military USA are going to be difficult. The only advice I would give you is hold you head up and don’t forget who you are. Never let anyone make you feel like it’s you who are the problem, or that you’re the one who needs to change.

How does someone read the words above and not think about a niece or nephew son or daughter?

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 1:27 AM

F15Mech on December 15, 2010 at 1:53 AM

I only entered that war toward the end when I was 13. If it had gone on longer, I would have got a whole lot more, I am sure.

Luka on December 15, 2010 at 1:49 AM

A’ight then. We’ll let this one go.

Kaisersoze on December 15, 2010 at 1:54 AM

Kaisersoze on December 15, 2010 at 1:52 AM

I said I’ve been married coming on 30 years. Never said I was in 30 years.

dakine on December 15, 2010 at 1:54 AM

Didn’t the gay LT know how to drive himself? That’s a very low rank to have a driver. Or did you mean the Brigade Commander’s driver?

Luka on December 15, 2010 at 1:53 AM

lol, no you’re correct that the young soldier was the Colonels duty driver. LTs would “love” to have their own Duty Driver thought. Ten bucks sez they’d like a CW5 as an aide-de-camp too. :-)

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 1:56 AM

Geez, I’m anti-black now too? Please, don’t tell my best friend Pierre, the guy I asked to do my last Army flight with. That’s a big honor if you don’t know.

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 1:52 AM

No, I don’t think you’re “anti-black”. However, the sentiments you expressed to F15 very well might’ve been expressed to a young trooper regarding blacks prior to Truman’s integration of the military following WWII.

dakine on December 15, 2010 at 1:57 AM

I said I’ve been married coming on 30 years. Never said I was in 30 years.

dakine on December 15, 2010 at 1:54 AM

So is this where you tell us you made O-6 in ten years and retired at 20?

Kaisersoze on December 15, 2010 at 1:57 AM

“Senator-elect Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut will take the oath and sit in Congress next January, even after it was revealed he had lied and lied for years about serving with the Marines in Vietnam. “Earned, Never Given,” is a famous recruiting slogan of the U.S. Marines. Now, perhaps, that will have to be amended to: “but, occasionally, purloined.”

Richard Blumenthal actually did, and with great distinction and great honor, serve with the U.S. Marines in Vietnam, but his modesty and concerns for national security have prevented him form reveling this. This brave and noble man would rather look the fool than betray his beloved nation and his beloved United States Marines Corp. Now thanks to information obtained by Heroleaks the real story can finally be told.

He had volunteered many times to be transferred from the reserves to join active duty Marines in Vietnam but was prevented from doing so by a secretive group called The Society of the the Scalding Pumpernickel. The societies members were all in total agreement that Richard Blumenthal had such great potential as a future American leader that his life must be preserved at all cost, even at the cost of the very life of someone who had to go to Vietnam in his place. Using all manner of clever disguise and subterfuge the The Society of the the Scalding Pumpernickel was able to have Richard Blumenthal’s repeated requests to be sent to Vietnam “disappeared” and instead were able to forge orders for him to be stationed in the Washington DC area where he would be able to wine and dine and hobnob with the rich and influential elite.

But Richard Blumenthal would have none of this! He was able to find another man who’s appearance was almost identical to his and was able to persuade this man to impersonate him and take his place to wine and dine and hobnob with the rich and influential elite in our nations capital. .Richard Blumenthal then made his way to the West Coast by a combination of walking, hitchhiking and riding the rails. After arriving at San Francisco, Richard Blumenthal then stowed away on a Chinese Junk, as he was all but penniless having donated almost all his money to various funds for orphans. Once he arrived in China, he made his way to South Vietnam, He found an outpost of U.S. Marines and while remaining out of sight stood watch over them like a Guardian Angel. Every time Viet Cong would try to overrun the Marine base, Richard Blumenthal would pick them off with an AK-47 that he had taken from a Viet Cong that he had strangled with his bare hands. The Marines there never knew this though and they just somehow assumed that it was they who had shot all those many Viet Cong. Contrary to Marine Corp legend however (and this has been a very closely guarded national security top secret for obvious reasons), Marines are mostly very bad shots and even with intensive and lengthy training by Army Soldiers, few Marines are ever able to hit anything smaller than a medium sized barn at no more than twenty paces, even with a whole extended magazine of ammo.This may have something to do with their vision and depth perception being so adversely affected by the shape of their heads, which is similar to that of a jar. This, of course, was something that the ever noble Richard Blumenthal never wanted to be revealed about his beloved Marine Corp, so he let them take all the credit and get all the medals for all his heroics even at the great cost of having much of the public hold him in scorn. And now, you know the rest of the story. I know all these things to be true because Richard Blumenthal told me all of this himself, and under oath, and Marines, especially those who were in Vietnam, would never lie..

Luka on December 15, 2010 at 2:00 AM

Thanks hawkdriver I am a male vet and your words actually means a-lot to this male USAF VET (Congrats on your “flying award”)TW :)

Thanks. I am actually 14 days retired now without having my actual ceremony with the division yet. I missed it in November and I have to put the uniform on one more time in Jan to do it then. I had decided to post an open invitation for any Hot Air in the area to come to it at Ft. Bragg if they wanted. It will most likely be the third Thursday and I will post the date/time for anyone who would like to have a mini-Hot Air get together at that time.

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 2:02 AM

I said I’ve been married coming on 30 years. Never said I was in 30 years.

dakine on December 15, 2010 at 1:54 AM

That’s not what your wife told me. She said none of her kids were yours either. And she wants the house.

Luka on December 15, 2010 at 2:04 AM

dakine on December 15, 2010 at 1:57 AM

Wow, talk about putting stuff in and pulling stuff out of your ass. GD man, that’s still some strong inuendo. Come on, my wife is Mexican/Japanese, my first serious GF was black and I’ve taught Black history of the Civil War to active duty soldiers. Do you really think I deserve that crap?

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 2:06 AM

That’s not what your wife told me.

Luka on December 15, 2010 at 2:04 AM

Yeah, this guy’s story isn’t adding up.

If he even is a guy, that is.

Rebar on December 15, 2010 at 2:09 AM

Do you really think I deserve that crap?

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 2:06 AM

That stuff is one more dashboard light to make me think he is fake. Everyone I have ever seen use the “Truman integrating the Army” comparison had never been in the military.

Congrats again on your retirement, the 82nd is a hard road to make a career of.

Kaisersoze on December 15, 2010 at 2:12 AM

Maybe we should go by who’s more highly decorated?

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 1:23 AM

That counts me out…I was just an enlisted puke unworthy of an officers rank. However a DFC (thank you hawkdriver) speaks volumes to me about an officer.

F15Mech on December 15, 2010 at 2:17 AM

Congrats again on your retirement, the 82nd is a hard road to make a career of.

Kaisersoze on December 15, 2010 at 2:12 AM

It’s funny, I was Corps almost my whole career here at Bragg. I deployed to Central and South America from Corps and all the while I had a running firefight with my Division buddies about what was better to be in. After we were absorbed into the CAB, we were just all serving together. Funny, actually. But I wouldn’t trade my five years now with America’s Guard of Honor for anything. (Considering we used to tease that they were “America’s Horde Of Goners”. :-)

What about you?

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 2:17 AM

So is this where you tell us you made O-6 in ten years and retired at 20?

Kaisersoze on December 15, 2010 at 1:57 AM

Here you go Kaiser: Married and commissioned in 1983. Retired in 2006. Still married in 2010.

dakine on December 15, 2010 at 2:18 AM

Yeah, this guy’s story isn’t adding up.

If he even is a guy, that is.

Rebar on December 15, 2010 at 2:09 AM

Says the supposed Cold War MP.

dakine on December 15, 2010 at 2:20 AM

That’s not what your wife told me. She said none of her kids were yours either. And she wants the house.

Luka on December 15, 2010 at 2:04 AM

You’re a dick. Marginally funny, but you’re still a dick. “Luka”? Really?

dakine on December 15, 2010 at 2:22 AM

F15Mech on December 15, 2010 at 2:17 AM

I wasn’t going on. I was just a little frustrated that it seems like your opinion was less important to him because of his comparison of careers. I was just making the point anyone can do that. And I don’t know of one officer, not one, who would look down on an enlisted man like that and openly demean his service to make a point. You be proud of what you’ve done and never let anyone say you haven’t stood up to be counted.

As a matter of fact, I think owe another note to LadyInGray about her son too.

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 2:23 AM

You’re a dick. Marginally funny, but you’re still a dick. “Luka”? Really?

dakine on December 15, 2010 at 2:22 AM

dakine, you really set the tenor for the way people talk to you.

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 2:28 AM

dakine, are you Hawaiian?

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 2:33 AM

You’re a dick. Marginally funny, but you’re still a dick. “Luka”? Really?

dakine on December 15, 2010 at 2:22 AM

Well pardon me. She didn’t tell me it was any big secret. She said all the neighbors know.

Luka on December 15, 2010 at 2:55 AM

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 2:23 AM

No worries as an E-4 VET I am used to arrogant officers.

At times some of them even got the hint on who really owns the aircraft they are allowed to fly.

F15Mech on December 15, 2010 at 2:57 AM

What about you?

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 2:17 AM

Back in the day I was in SOCOM Civil Affairs in the mid 80′s back when no one knew what it was, but worked with a lot of great guys in 5th SFG. I got out and finished college but stayed in the reserves and went back for the Desert Storm stuff and a year in Bosnia that I want back. I retired out of the reserves as an E8 four years ago.

Funny side story, I’m an tech startup guy/entrepreneur in LA now and knew a friend in a Venture Capital fund for four or five years until he left and was looking for a new job. He sent me his resume and I had never known it but he was a 82nd CAB LT just down Ardennes from me at the same time I was at Bragg. Its a small, small world.

Kaisersoze on December 15, 2010 at 2:59 AM

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 2:23 AM

BTW I know earn more then you and dakine so in all honesty the joke is on him.

F15Mech on December 15, 2010 at 2:59 AM

Here you go Kaiser: Married and commissioned in 1983. Retired in 2006. Still married in 2010.

dakine on December 15, 2010 at 2:18 AM

So you were in 18 years, allegedly in SOF, prior to OIF and still don’t mentioned any combat deployments.

Hmmmmmmm…

Kaisersoze on December 15, 2010 at 3:01 AM

As a matter of fact, I think owe another note to LadyInGray about her son too.

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 2:23 AM

Not attempting to speak for LadyInGray but I think she would appropriate it

F15Mech on December 15, 2010 at 3:13 AM

BTW Hawkdriver, I live in Hollywood and have a lot of friends in the entertainment industry. I was a party about six months ago and met a guy who had the film rights to do a movie about Mike Novosel. We talked about financing ideas, etc and had been working on the project for six months or so. He had no experience with the military whatsoever but it was obvious that he was still in awe of dustoff pilots and on some levels just could not comprehend how pilots could fly into hot zones over and over again. I haven’t talked to him since but I really hope he makes the movie and know he will do it justice. It was one of those funny conversations where I said some variation of “Yes, they really are crazy” six or seven times.

Kaisersoze on December 15, 2010 at 3:16 AM

Kaisersoze on December 15, 2010 at 3:16 AM

Any CSAR pilot deserves respect. I would love to see a factual movie about the “dust off” pilots.

F15Mech on December 15, 2010 at 3:36 AM

I’ll trade 214s on the open internet if you want.

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 1:01 AM

While I will not trade mine on the open internet, I will gladly send my 214 to someone like Michelle or Ed to hold/review and pass judgment on.

F15Mech on December 15, 2010 at 3:55 AM

When I was in the Corps, ’61 to ’63 we were taught to use the ‘buddy system’ where you could end up fighting back to back.

Since then have worked for thirty years with convicted felons. The homosexual is the inmate who will always rat or sell out the other inmates. I would not trust a homosexual with my back.

You can call me a bigot or whatever, but I have good sense.

jarhead0311 on December 15, 2010 at 6:08 AM

77% of the population think gays should serve openly in the military. How many of that 77% would willingly serve in the military much less serve in a fox hole with a homosexual? The numbers are surprisingly low.

Less than 1% serves this country. Don’t tell me how to do my job if you cant or wont do it along side me.

If you want to serve, do so. Just keep your sex life to yourself.

Gunner105 on December 15, 2010 at 6:44 AM

You can call me a bigot or whatever, but I have good sense.

jarhead0311 on December 15, 2010 at 6:08 AM

I don’t know why this is that hard to figure out. You are introducing open sexual relationships between same sexes into the equation. So, like what happens if a homosexual thinks a straight guy is cute and keeps hitting on him, but then his other gay friend is jealous. Now, the three of them are in the shower, in a fox hole, out on patrol. Oh, wait, I forgot, homosexuals are above the rest of us. They don’t have jealousy issues. They never hit on straights. They never fantasize or get turned on by naked bodies.

I think Darwin said it best, if you can force straights to bunk and shower with homosexuals, then force straight females to bunk and shower with straight men. Why not? That wouldn’t be a distraction, would it? Oh wait, forgot again, gay people are better than the rest of us. They are on a higher plain. They can totally control themselves when it comes to sex. Yeah, it’s not like they parade it out on the streets or anything.

JellyToast on December 15, 2010 at 6:53 AM

beyond that, it’s hard to fathom how the most famously tough-minded troops in the world, the tip of the American spear, would be so thrown by serving alongside an occasional gay solider that it might lead to one of them getting his legs blown off.

AP, I’m guessing you never served in the military because this statement reveals how civilians can never understand the military let alone the Corps. And while openly serving gays may work fine with in the Navy or Air Force and maybe even for the REMF’s in the Army and the Marines, it will never, Never, N.E.V.E.R, fly with the line companies in the Army and Marines.

Line companies are where the rubber hits the road. Every other MOS exists to support these combat units and it aint no pic nic. Props to all my bros and sis who endured the hardshops of life at “remote” FOB’s, but to a grunt those FOB’s are where we can finally relax…. in the rear with the gear and curse the type writer jockies and skaters for the luxuries they flaunt (cots, an MRE warmed over a heat tab, a sh!t can instead of balancing one cheek on an e-tool)

Personal weaknesses of any sort are magnified and regardless of the PC, homosexuality is perceived as a weakness. And while I’m sure I served alongside gays in the Corps, I never met one who would dare openly state it. It would be far more than a distraction, it would crack unit cohesion. To do so in a grunt unit would be asking for everyone to shun you. The tension and stress grunts work under can’t be described. We’d come back in the wire after a 5 day patrol still running on adrenaline and inevitably there was a fight in the chow line as some candy ass cut in front of us or made a comment about how bad we smell.

I’m at a loss to explain why it wouldn’t work but anyone whoever served as a grunt know EXACTLY what I mean when I underscore that it wouldn’t. Even if they repeal DADT, I’m betting that the only grunts who would out themselves are the sh!tbirds and guys trying to get kicked out.

Openly serving gays may work in corporate America and can probably be defended on a technical level in Cambridge classrooms, but sometimes those theories and social experiments the pointy headed professors dream up don’t pan out in the violent and surreal world grunts operate in.

What-ev, I realize I won’t change any minds here, just trying to give you a glimpse from the guys who’d have to live and operate in these conditions.

Alden Pyle on December 15, 2010 at 7:00 AM

“Intuitive behavior” is an issue in combat situations, but U.S. allies manage to do fine with gay troops and, again, Amos seems to have no theory of how troops’ intuition might be affected.

Most of our allies couldn’t defend themselves from an invasion of kittens. Europe’s defense relies almost entirely on the threat of America coming to kick the other guy’s ass.

Enough with the “but weaker countries do just fine!” excuse. By that mark we should be making great performing students change their strategies because, hey, okay performing students do just fine.

amerpundit on December 15, 2010 at 7:36 AM

I hate the fact that people are screwing with my Marine Corps. I really hope for the sake of this country that I’m wrong and this will be all about nothing. But I don’t think your end product is going to be the same, I really don’t. I think our military will become a mirror of civillian society, and if that is the case you should be terrified. A lot of folks throw the term “combat’ around on this thread and they have no idea what the word means. Most troops serving in Afghanistan or Iraq have never even seen it, yet they think they are experts on it. A convoy is not combat, a FOB is not combat. Hitting an IED doesn’t give you some deep insight into combat, it just means you were unlucky. Yet people who have never sent a 5.56mm round crashing into someone elses sternum want to tell me how I need to run my show? To hell with that.

gator70 on December 15, 2010 at 7:56 AM

Dakine, I have not read this entire thread so this may have been covered, but let me address a few points.

1. A substantial proportion of homosexuals seem to view everything through a prism of “gayness,” i.e., rather than looking at things as simply a person or even an American, everything is “as a gay man I…” Not everyone does this–I don’t ever think of something as a “woman’s issue,” but look at whether this is right and good for for my country.

2. The “homosexual agenda,” for those homosexuals who have an agenda, seems to be one of forced acceptance, as if they will not rest until every facet of society welcomes homosexuality (which means, having to know about someone’s sexual proclivities). Anyone with convictions that homosexuality is wrong or homosexual behavior is a negative is expected to shut up about them, and to remain silent no matter what they see going on in their own society (about which many of us care passionately).

3. Many people who want to repeal DADT claim to have known gays in the military; Admiral Mullen has talked about serving with them throughout his career. So the issue isn’t one of “Can gays serve in the military?” but one of “Can they openly serve?” The distinction really is important, because the demand for the latter is the demand for acceptance, regardless of beliefs.

4. Equating opposition to homosexuality (“homophobia” a truly absurd expression) to racism is intellectually dishonest. Homosexuality is a behavior based upon desire; one’s race is not a behavior, but a biological state.

5. Calling people bigots because they have convictions different from one’s own is an intellectually weak tactic. “Come, let us reason together” depends upon the ability to discuss this subject candidly, in pursuit of truth. It often seems that supporters of gay _______ (whatever) insist on resorting to name-calling when someone brings up a viewpoint they find unpleasant (this, of course, is not limited to the issue of homosexuality, but that it the subject at hand).

It does not bode well for our country when what wins the day is who is loudest, rather than what our reason has led us to. Thomas Jefferson said, “We are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor to tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it.” Our greatest obligation as human beings is to pursue truth, which requires us to be willing to listen as well as talk. I am done talking now.

DrMagnolias on December 15, 2010 at 8:09 AM

If DADT is repealed, I suspect you’ll see a large exodus from the armed forces and the re-imposition of the draft. And that (bringing back the draft) I think is the real point of this exercise.

zoyclem on December 15, 2010 at 8:16 AM

F15Mech on December 15, 2010 at 2:59 AM

You would have to be making a “lot” of money to be making more than me. Good on you if you are.

Kaisersoze on December 15, 2010 at 2:59 AM

Very interesting story. I have a high school friend that is actually very well known there. He’s an Oscar winning special effects artist. He owns his own company too.

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 8:18 AM

DrMagnolias on December 15, 2010 at 8:09 AM

Doc, that was well put together. I think you should get your own threads in the Green Room.

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 8:22 AM

Yet people who have never sent a 5.56mm round crashing into someone elses sternum want to tell me how I need to run my show? To hell with that.

gator70 on December 15, 2010 at 7:56 AM

Amen brother. I was struck by the enthusiasm of one of the young door gunners that wanted to fly in my little detachment. And then how quickly he thought he needed to be back to his line unit once the aircraft started getting hit during deliberate operations.

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 8:29 AM

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 8:22 AM

Thank you, Hawk. But oh, the pressure–I could never take the pressure. :)

DrMagnolias on December 15, 2010 at 8:29 AM

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 2:02 AM

Congratulations on the retirement!

DrSteve on December 15, 2010 at 8:42 AM

DrSteve on December 15, 2010 at 8:42 AM

Thanks Doc.

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 8:47 AM

This poll is completely irrelevant. They are not the ones in the military.

Gabe on December 14, 2010 at 9:41 PM

The ast time I checked, civilians decided policy, and members of the armed service obeyed those decisions.

Perhaps you feel it should be otherwise?

JohnGalt23 on December 15, 2010 at 9:03 AM

If the Marines don’t want this, the Marines should not be forced to have this, period. Nothing, not one damed thing else matters. Opinons other than that of the United States Marines do not count.

MikeA on December 14, 2010 at 9:50 PM

Flirting with fascism.

JohnGalt23 on December 15, 2010 at 9:06 AM

Flirting with fascism.

JohnGalt23 on December 15, 2010 at 9:06 AM

Straight Marines not wanting this and making themselves heard is “flirting with fascism”.

But gay Marines “wanting” this and forcing it the other ones isn’t?

You guys want it bad.

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 9:12 AM

Straight Marines not wanting this and making themselves heard is “flirting with fascism”.

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 9:12 AM

No. Holding a position that the desires of members of the armed services overrides the will of the people, as represented by their Congress, is flirting with fascism.

Congress will eventually decide this. If members of the Marine Corps do not like it, the exits are clearly marked.

JohnGalt23 on December 15, 2010 at 9:19 AM

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 9:12 AM

Yeah, they do. By “Binging” the subject, a bunch of polls being lauded by thinkprogress.com, mediamatters.com, and theadvocate.com comes up. A small percentage of 5 % of America’s population wants to force the rest of America to accept their behavior as normal…and America ain’t buying it.

kingsjester on December 15, 2010 at 9:19 AM

I think Gen Amos is saying he doesnt want his Corps turned into sodomites, but he cant come out and say it.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again – if homosexuality is allowed in the military, then in all fairness all offenses of a sexual nature should no longer be prosecuted under UCMJ. Why is homosexuality so special?

abcurtis on December 15, 2010 at 9:25 AM

Congress will eventually decide this. If members of the Marine Corps do not like it, the exits are clearly marked.

JohnGalt23 on December 15, 2010 at 9:19 AM

Yeah, that’s the answer to everything isnt it? Dont dare make a stand for right and wrong. oh no, not that.

abcurtis on December 15, 2010 at 9:26 AM

Flirting with fascism.

JohnGalt23 on December 15, 2010 at 9:06 AM

How about Fighting for the Freedom to FREELY express oneself without the threat of an attack by PC Storm Troopers such as yourself?

Why should I give up MY RIGHTS to accommodate a loathsome personal sexual behavior that disgusts me? Don’t worry about my “fascism” though, I am equally disgusted by incest perpetrators.

Incest Okay With HuffPo Crowd
http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2010/12/incest-okay-wit.html

Roy Rogers on December 15, 2010 at 9:40 AM

Hmmm … looks like Allah is writing this post with a clearly PRO-REPEAL DADT tone …

Alah can’t seem to fathom how “distraction” could affect troops in combat.

Perhaps that’s because Allah never served in combat?

You know – this is really where experience in combat counts. If you can imagine – being in a state of constant bodily threat … every day, seeing another one of your comrades getting his head blown up. Cleaning up the body parts – bagging them … loading them on the Helo and looking to a fellow Marine and saying … “Did we find all of him?” Then returning to base, breaking out a pen and paper and writing your buddy’s parents … his girlfriend … his wife … and then writing TWO letters for each of his twin 5 year old baby girls – because YOUR letter will be the only information they ever receive of what a hero their Dad was. It’ll be a letter they keep the rest of their lives – it may make the difference in the path they take – growing up fatherless … so you better put your heart and soul into that letter and write a damn good one.

And then get up … maybe the next morning … go on a mission … and maybe have to do it all over again … with a different buddy.

If you don’t think that takes a toll on a human being – you are a fool my friend.

And these men have little patience for a “social engineering” program that is designed to make less than 10 percent of the military population and their civilian counterparts feel good about themselves.

These men want to see a bit more support for thier mission. They want to see a bit more support for the families of their fellow Marines that have been KIA’d. This policy will make them angry – and question the priorities of a government who asks them to risk all – while simultaneously being saddled with a demand to make a liberal social engineering program work.

Allah – if you don’t think that’s a problem – then I don’t know what to tell you.

And as far as our “allies” go … they aren’t doing the heavy lifting out there Allah – they can deal with a bit more than our folks are.

HondaV65 on December 15, 2010 at 9:41 AM

If members of the Marine Corps do not like it, the exits are clearly marked.

JohnGalt23 on December 15, 2010 at 9:19 AM

Telling them to get the f*ck out is freely bantied about by a lot of folks here on Hot Air. So let me get this striaght, you’d tell an otherwise model soldier to “get out”, if he or she has moral opinion about open serving gays?

And you have served?

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 9:42 AM

If members of the Marine Corps do not like it, the exits are clearly marked.

JohnGalt23 on December 15, 2010 at 9:19 AM

No they aren’t. If they don’t like it – they can’t leave the Marine Corps until their contract is up. Otherwise they’re subject to punishment iaw the UCMJ.

Do you know what you’re talking about?

HondaV65 on December 15, 2010 at 9:48 AM

JohnGalt23 on December 15, 2010 at 9:19 AM

So your story is that whatever Congress wants you want? Well, it looks like Congress wants to continue tax cuts for the rich. Therefore, your view must that anybody who does not want that can hit the exits.

Right?

Really Right on December 15, 2010 at 9:49 AM

Really Right on December 15, 2010 at 9:49 AM

John Galt is being intellectually dishonest when he says they can “hit the exits”.

There are NO exits.

But if John Galt wants to put his money where his mouth is … HE CAN MAKE SOME EXITS.

Huh?

How about this … make this a policy …

DADT is repealed and any servicemember who wants separation based on this can immediatly leave the service and void the rest of his contract.

If you really believe that John – GO FOR IT.

You won’t do it – and neither will Congress – because all of this “like it or lump it” talk is just chest beating horse manure from a bunch of cowards who KNOW that our folks in uniform can’t leave.

Make it a policy – since when these people enlisted they enlisted with the understanding that DADT was policy that they could support. If you’re going to violate their privacy rights now by forcing them to shower with people who are sexually attracted to them – then the least you can do is allow them to sever the contract you negotiated with them.

Our Congress are cowards if they don’t do this.

But then again – is that surprising?

HondaV65 on December 15, 2010 at 9:54 AM

Hey Ala pin head
Perhaps this Marine doesn’t want his men to become emos and if you think that other military’s are as effective as our Marines you sir are full of crap.

david kumbera on December 15, 2010 at 9:59 AM

The point often missed by proponents of allowing openly gay individuals to serve is one of privacy. There is little to no privacy when serving and frequently showers are open bay as are living conditions.

We have historically segregated young men and women for precisely these issues. At least when I served in the Army men and women lived on separate floors and access to either floor by the opposite sex was a no no without a reason and was always accompanied by a shouted warning “female on the floor”. The warning was yelled to alert people living on the floor that a member of the opposite sex was moving about the barracks floor and to cover up. It is simply a courtesy so service men and women can enjoy a modicum of privacy from members of the opposite sex.

Proponents of ending don’t ask don’t tell are in effect saying that straight men and women must lose what little privacy they may enjoy so gays can serve openly.

To put a fine point on the matter, what precisely does serving in an openly gay capacity mean? Does this mean that so long as one is off duty that public displays of affection are okay? Does this include in the barracks and in communal living areas? In an open bay shower for example?
At present, males and females remain largely segregated from one another in living quarters to specifically inhibit this sort of behavior and when it is discovered disciplinary action is frequently forth coming.

If this proposal stands, have we not in effect codified a new 2 tier system whereby gay men and women are able to live openly and engage in behavior that many would find disruptive in living quarters but straight men and women remain segregated from members of the opposite sex?

Does this mean that a service member might walk into a shower late at night and find candles and 2 soldiers scrubbing each others backs? I say this jokingly to underscore the point that at present there are rules that keep this sort of disruptive behavior from happening with straights or gays. However if we end this policy, what are the new norms?

The current policy does a pretty good job of splitting the difference in an imperfect world. If the current policy is replaced, it is my view that a number of unintended consequences are likely to result in distractions and a period of uncertainty while new rules and regulations are formed.

R Square on December 15, 2010 at 9:59 AM

oh god you guys went at this again? @Hawkdriver are you still pushing your religious beliefs on every one else and asking if they served? Should we revisit civilian control of the military or the fact that any change is predicated by the same tired arguments of mass desertions, and loss of order? When in fact order is imposed and all you are now strutting about is that a few officers will have to take a class and you can’t kick people out for being gay? Read the book on the matter than get back to me

Zekecorlain on December 15, 2010 at 10:00 AM

Incest Okay With HuffPo Crowd
http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2010/12/incest-okay-wit.html

Roy Rogers on December 15, 2010 at 9:40 AM

There was a time when I was firmly convinced that gay issues, as they were at the time, were very fair for consideration. Them having the ability to take care of their partner and protect joint assets was actually something any American should have been supportive of. I know I have some more Conservative freinds who might disagree, but that’s where my opinion started. And they certainly deserve the protections under the law from harm that anyone else does.

(Although the hate crime laws don’t ever seem to address when the hate is directed at a majority group or Christains, but whatever)

But this whole movement has taken on an ugly, ugly face and I do believe now the concerns of, what I formally thought was more extreme opinion, are justified. That the normal envelope would be pushed to equate the relationship status to heterosexual marriage and forcing straight people into situations they are morally opposed to; such as cohabitation with gays in the military. I can’t for the life of me understand why any proponent of repealing DADT would not at least concede that it would be proper to billet people of a different sexual preference separately. But maybe I do get it now. Like you Roy, I also fear the next thing to be normalized, like incest.

The comments at HuffPo regarding David Epstein are really quite revealing. And I’m not sure any gay here or their supporters has a moral position to argue what he did was wrong. What would be next?

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 10:03 AM

Should we revisit civilian control of the military or the fact that any change is predicated by the same tired arguments of mass desertions, and loss of order?
Zekecorlain on December 15, 2010 at 10:00 AM

No, please don’t bother with all of that. Just rehash your same tired old lies and go straight to the name calling.

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 10:05 AM

HondaV65 on December 15, 2010 at 9:54 AM

Bravo! I love these love it or leave it types. I figured since I have over 20 years serving as a Marine in the Combat arms and 5 tours in Iraq and Afghanistan and don’t forget all previous deployments, that I might just have an opinion on this with a little bit of street cred. Instead I get love it or leave it from some ass clown who just assumes I’m being a bigot without trying to understand my point of view.

gator70 on December 15, 2010 at 10:05 AM

Not that I’ve been polled, but…

As a former officer in the USNR, I will register my opposition to the repeal and say I am glad I’m no longer in.

As the wife of a former Naval Aviator, I will register my husband’s ditto to that and my relief that he is no longer in.

As the sister of a former member of the USAF, I will register her opposition to the repeal.

As the sister-in-law of a current member of the USArmy, I will register his opposition to the repeal.

As the sister-in-law of a current member of the USAF, I will register his opposition to the repeal.

Whether they will get out is in question. The one in the USAF just re-upped, so he’s stuck for a while anyway, and with the sour economy, many are left with little choice right now. I think that is exactly what homosexuals and pro-homosexual agenda advocates are counting on. But if they are forced to put up with nonsense, I’d wager they’ll get out. In other words, they’ll likely get out early.

As the neighbor to a young man who has been considering joining the military, and asked for my and my husband’s opinions, I no longer encourage him and neither do his parents, until this is resolved.

Having been forced to sit through enough moronic sensitivity training for normal ‘sexual harrassment’, I can imagine it won’t take long until the nonsense begins and the soldiers, sailors, and marines who disapprove of the aberrant behavior, ie the Christians, get sick of being told they are the ones with the problem.

My understanding is that normal men do not like being hit on by other men. It is like their masculinity is being questioned or something. And no, it doesn’t mean they are insecure in their own masculinity, as many homosexual agenda proponents like to argue. Normal men just don’t like it. It pis*es them off and or creeps them out. Sometimes, they react aggressively. This is especially true of young testosterone filled men like those who would typically join the Armed Forces.

For example, one brother-in-law, early in his career, was propositioned by a homosexual member of the Army and said brother-in-law nearly beat the sh*t out of said homosexual because of it. He didn’t, because my sister showed up just in the nick of time. Had brother-in-law done so, he would have likely been discharged, as well as the homosexual. It would have been a great loss for the Army (not the homosexual who was discharged due to other emotional related issues. Imagine that.). Brother-in-law is a fine serviceman who has won one of the most prestigious awards given for non-combat related duties. And it isn’t that he’s some hothead bigot. He didn’t like being hit on by a man. He’s normal. It is what it is. /anecdotal evidence

And those military members who think it won’t really matter to them personally ‘because they already serve with homosexuals’ are in for a rude awakening when they are brought up in front of their XO’s for expressing their religious beliefs, etc… As has been repeated over and over, this is not about homosexuals serving their country. They already can, but they can’t openly proposition their straight fellow servicemen. This is about shutting up those who disagree with aberrant behavior (not to be confused with unchosen racial or ethnic identity), in particular, Christians, because that is who makes up the majority of military recruits.

Who, having known the justice of God, did not understand that they who do such things, are worthy of death; and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them.

This will end badly.

pannw on December 15, 2010 at 10:06 AM

Zekecorlain on December 15, 2010 at 10:00 AM

BTW, you’re going to support Epstein boinking his daughter, right?

hawkdriver on December 15, 2010 at 10:08 AM

Zekecorlain on December 15, 2010 at 10:00 AM

Ah … the “civilian control” canard …

Does Congress dictate how often a crapper is cleaned on a submarine?

Does Congress dictate how a nuclear reactor on an Aircraft Carrier is operated?

Does Congress dictate how the services recruit members?

No … they do not.

There is … QUITE A LOT … that Congress doesn’t get involved with.

“CIVILIAN CONTROL” means control in the sense that most people drive their cars. They tell the car where to go … how fast to go … etc. They don’t tell the car how to operate the anti-lock brake system – or when to blow the airbags in a collision …

“Civilian Control” … means “big picture control” … and I submit that a social engineering policy which is pushed by a liberal homosexual civilian lobby for less than 10 percent of servicemembers (maybe) … is not “big picture”.

In fact – it’s quite small potatos

HondaV65 on December 15, 2010 at 10:09 AM

pannw on December 15, 2010 at 10:06 AM

Excellent post, ma’am.

kingsjester on December 15, 2010 at 10:10 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5