View Full Version : The Pussification of the US Military
insider
12-22-2010, 07:14 AM
First it was allowing females to serve in combat roles, now it's allowing open gayness!
How long before there will be a total meltdown of discipline?:1139png:
The US military is not supposed to mirror society, it is supposed to serve above and beyond! Too much political correctness, this will lead to nothing but trouble.
It is unit cohesion and morale I am worried about.
This was nothing more than 0bama paying off for campaign contributions.
First it was allowing females to serve in combat roles, now it's allowing open gayness!
How long before there will be a total meltdown of discipline?:1139png:
The US military is not supposed to mirror society, it is supposed to serve above and beyond! Too much political correctness, this will lead to nothing but trouble.
You don't see ranks of British or Dutch troops breaking line in Afghanistan. They don't have quasi-homophobic policies in their military. Once again DADT always proves that there's always an American way to do everything.
mriddick
12-22-2010, 08:41 AM
If you are one of the claimed socially liberal/fiscal conservative types who seem to be in the majority around here you can go to the mirror take a good look and thank yourself for helping enact this policy. It's silly to me for a board that continually promotes the socially liberal line complains when socially liberal policies are enacted, what do you people think socially liberal means?
btcave
12-22-2010, 08:53 AM
It is unit cohesion and morale I am worried about.
Unit cohesion and morale will likely stay intact with gay soldiers serving.
...when they let women in the infantry units, it's over. All male units behave vastly different than mixed sex units.
You don't see ranks of British or Dutch troops breaking line in Afghanistan. They don't have quasi-homophobic policies in their military. Once again DADT always proves that there's always an American way to do everything.
You don't see ours doing that either.
In our Military, you aren't an open anything which is the basis of DADT. Point is, it doesn't matter if you are gay or the post Casanova DADT applies.
Being in the military means you are a tooth on a gear which is part of a piece of equipment with a job to do. Being bi, gay or straight has nothing to do with it. Now, as "open" sexual orientation is so important will other sexual orientations (EG. bisexual or how about wife swapping?) be supported?
How about a Tab; to identify various sexual orientations?
Point is past shut and soldier, soldier no one gives a shit because no one wants to hear it and until now, that applied equally from the post stud to a gay.
Unit cohesion and morale will likely stay intact with gay soldiers serving.
Agreed.
Gays have been in the military for years; it is recognizing them a group and denying other "groups." Ft Bragg denied a wiccan widow permission to put whatever the wiccan symbol is on his grave. Why is a Wiccans choice of religion denied while a Gay is granted "public status."
...when they let women in the infantry units, it's over. All male units behave vastly different than mixed sex units.
I know, however, what is the difference to special interest groups? The only thing stopping it is there isn't enough time between now and 1 Jan.
Mark Ducati
12-22-2010, 09:29 AM
A few years ago, there was a report about boot camp recruits being given "stress cards"... the purpose of the cards was for the recruit to pull it out if he couldn't take the drill sargent yelling/cussing at him/her...
Do they still distribute those cards?
Snopes says this is a myth and not true... but on the military forums, there are reports that they were indeed used.
gpwasr10
12-22-2010, 09:35 AM
First off, I know fags that could kick the ass out many of this membership.
Most Western Militaries actually allow openly gay people to serve in their ranks... However... Here is a list of nations that do not....
1) Iran
2) North Korea
3) Cuba
4) China
5) Vietnam
6) Laos
7) Belarus
8) Libya
9) Sudan
10) Zimbabwe
11) Venezuela
12) Myanmar (Burma)
13) Saudi Arabia
14) Syria
15) Azerbaijan
16) Kuwait (questionable)
17) United States
Notice anything about that list? Cause right now we are on it.
btcave
12-22-2010, 09:39 AM
I''ve heard of the stress cards, but can't tell you if it was true at some point, but the recruits coming out of infantry basic training have poor discipline compared to just 10 years ago. Makes a infantry platoon sergeants job and the jobs of his subordinate NCO's that much harder.
Ruskiegunlover
12-22-2010, 10:03 AM
MORE signs that whatever is coming down the pike at us, will not be easy. The left has destroyed this country, arguably this WORLD. The reason for this now is that we are ALL victims, and because of that we all have RIGHTS. Well, except to self defense......In boot camp you can't yell and scream, hit or cuss at a recruit to toughen him up! That'll violate his rights, hurt his feelings! And if they can't take it, well, guess they'll just get to sit it out.......
We would never have won WWII with the attitudes, ideas, and shit going on today........
I am, in a weird way, sort of happy to be watching everything fall apart. Imagine getting to LIVE and see Rome burn......how important that was in history. Thats what we are all slowly watching.....
American Rage
12-22-2010, 10:10 AM
1. First off, I know fags that could kick the ass out many of this membership.
2. Most Western Militaries actually allow openly gay people to serve in their ranks... However... Here is a list of nations that do not....
1. Big fuckin' deal! Faggotry is a mental disorder, and people that are nuts often have unusual strength. However, they are also very illogical, otherwise they wouldn't be trying to stick their penis in a bacteria filled orfice. So, the queer kicks my ass on the street, and I blow his brains out in an alley. Now tell me who is the real winner?
2. The vast majority of Western nations that allow faggots to serve are in Europe. Europe has been run by the socialist/marxist since the end of WWII. One of the goals of the euro-libs has been to end war permanently. First they want to end it in Europe, and the the rest of the world. Like America's libs (who seem to get all their ideas from Euro-libs), the Euro-libs are about nothing but spreading socialism and marxism throughout the land. Therefore, the Euro-libs often see a weakened military as a sign of strength, in their twisted view. The result has been poor performing militaries in the vast majority of Euro-lib armies. You can see that anyway you wish, but I see it as suicidal stupidity on a national scale.
Rage
Gay soldier: "And I think that's why yellow makes me sad"
Gunny: "You know what makes me sad"?
Break out the Pink ACU's
mriddick
12-22-2010, 10:37 AM
The social conservative in me really disagrees with the new regs but isn't it a catch 22 argument in that every current and ex military type admits gays have and are currently in the military? If that is true then intergration will not be a huge concern simply because they are already intergrated into the military. Besides do you really think they are going to announce enmass their gayness? I bet 90% will continue to keep it secret and choose to stay in the closet with their sexuality. About the only change will be guys who lay a beat down on a guy for being gay will reported at a higher rate and probably be punished in greater numbers (since gays will not be afraid to report it as much).
I've asked my 3 sons, 2 don't care and one is against the change, all say they doubt it will affect them, all suspect they are serving with gay airmen now. I'm not for the change but in reality it's not going to matter much and I doubt today's military is anyworse then the military of ol. Afterall wasn't the VN generation unfairly put down by the WW2 vets? I guess now it's the VN vets turn to put down the current generation, I bet in time this generation will find something to put down future serving generations.
matshock
12-22-2010, 10:39 AM
Unit cohesion and morale will likely stay intact with gay soldiers serving.
...when they let women in the infantry units, it's over. All male units behave vastly different than mixed sex units.
Israel's IDF tried that then reverted back to male-only infantry units. It was found that when a woman was wounded in combat that the affect on moral was far more pronounced than if a man were wounded- often paralyzing.
matshock
12-22-2010, 10:45 AM
The social conservative in me really disagrees with the new regs but isn't it a catch 22 argument in that every current and ex military type admits gays have and are currently in the military? If that is true then intergration will not be a huge concern simply because they are already intergrated into the military. Besides do you really think they are going to announce enmass their gayness? I bet 90% will continue to keep it secret and choose to stay in the closet with their sexuality. About the only change will be guys who lay a beat down on a guy for being gay will reported at a higher rate and probably be punished in greater numbers (since gays will not be afraid to report it as much).
I've asked my 3 sons, 2 don't care and one is against the change, all say they doubt it will affect them, all suspect they are serving with gay airmen now. I'm not for the change but in reality it's not going to matter much and I doubt today's military is anyworse then the military of ol. Afterall wasn't the VN generation unfairly put down by the WW2 vets? I guess now it's the VN vets turn to put down the current generation, I bet in time this generation will find something to put down future serving generations.
I admire your sons' esprit de corps.
This move was done to hurt them- look at the people who voted for it.
Don't believe me now, just wait for the first openly gay recruits to move into training next Summer and for the first stories of forced outing/emotional abuse to surface.
First off, I know fags that could kick the ass out many of this membership.
True, but do the fags know it will be a gun fight? :D
Most Western Militaries actually allow openly gay people to serve in their ranks... However... Here is a list of nations that do not....
1) Iran
2) North Korea
3) Cuba
4) China
5) Vietnam
6) Laos
7) Belarus
8) Libya
9) Sudan
10) Zimbabwe
11) Venezuela
12) Myanmar (Burma)
13) Saudi Arabia
14) Syria
15) Azerbaijan
16) Kuwait (questionable)
17) United States
Notice anything about that list? Cause right now we are on it.
We don't keep what we take with the sword so that puts America on a very small list.
The best part of DADT getting all the attention as 0bama and the democrats domestic failures are being ignored.
I liked DADT because it is none of my business if a squad member or a co-worker is straight or gay. Add I don't give a damn what they are as long as they pull their weight and you got it.
Similar arguments were advanced when blacks and whites were integrated in the US military in 1948. But who now, on this thread, wants to reintroduce segregation on racial lines? The same will happen with gays. In a few years most people will be amazed at the current fuss. This is one of these reforms that, once the bullet is bitten, there's no going back.
President Truman had been examining the issue of segregation in the armed forces since at least 1947, when he appointed the President's Committee on Civil Rights. By January 1948, internal White House memos indicated that the President was determined to end military segregation by executive order. However, it was not until the delegates at the 1948 Democratic National Convention called for a liberal civil rights plank that included desegregation of the armed forces that Truman felt comfortable enough to issue Executive Order No. 9981 on July 26. The order stated that "It is hereby declared to be the policy of the President that there shall be equality of treatment and opportunity for all persons in the armed services without regard to race, color, religion, or national origin." The order also established the President's Committee on Equality of Treatment and opportunity in the Armed Services (Fahy Committee).
Naturally, there was resistance to this order within the military. Staff officers from all branches protested anonymously and sometimes even openly to integration. The Fahy Committee worked with the different branches of the military to ensure that the armed forces instituted integration in their recruitment and unit composition practices. Full integration did not come until the Korean War however, when heavy casualties forced segregated units to merge for survival.
http://www.trumanlibrary.org/anniversaries/71-2530.jpg
1953 banner to honour the integration of the United States Armed Forces
Source (http://www.trumanlibrary.org/anniversaries/desegblurb.htm)
63DH8
12-22-2010, 01:28 PM
You don't see ranks of British or Dutch troops breaking line in Afghanistan. They don't have quasi-homophobic policies in their military. Once again DADT always proves that there's always an American way to do everything.
You're comparing apples and oranges. Different societies react different to different situations. As someone who served in the US Army for two enlistments, I can honestly say, as long as gays conduct themselves in a professional manner, most military members won't have a problem. When it comes to being in combat with gays, sexual preference isn't going to matter. What's going to matter is how well the other person is doing their job.
I got a feeling that, if there are any assault or harassment will be judged more fairly than how the civilian courts judge. It'll be judged as an assault against a fellow solider instead of against a gay person. The punishment for assault in the military is harsher than for civilians.
Kadmos
12-22-2010, 01:31 PM
However, they are also very illogical, otherwise they wouldn't be trying to stick their penis in a bacteria filled orfice.
Pretty sure all human orifices are bacteria filled.
So given that your logic would end the human race, you may want to rethink.
Similar arguments were advanced when blacks and whites were integrated in the US military in 1948. But who now, on this thread, wants to reintroduce segregation on racial lines? The same will happen with gays. In a few years most people will be amazed at the current fuss. This is one of these reforms that, once the bullet is bitten, there's no going back.
That isn't what was said by Mitch McConnell Ky-R on Fox this morning.
To make your point you really need to get access to what is being said in our news....
If you want to discuss the issues as an informed source stay current with what is being said. If your intent is to do as liberals do or simply run wild and play loose with with the facts; keep doing what you are doing.
As a leftist you might be able to answer if all this DADT hoopla is a distraction to get the spot light off how badly 0bama is failing? Since DADT hit the news we aren't hearing anything else about our failed president.
You're comparing apples and oranges.
Did you expect any different from a member of the left?
63DH8
12-22-2010, 01:50 PM
Did you expect any different from a member of the left?
Ahhh... I keep forgetting. Oh well! They're good for entertainment value. :coffee:
That isn't what was said by Mitch McConnell Ky-R on Fox this morning.
Fox News hasn't a good reputation in Britain. Glenn Beck, for example, is seen as hysterical, ignorant, stupid and probably certifiable. But please, link to McConnell and I'll take a look.
Did you expect any different from a member of the left?
As others have said above, right-wing libertarian members of Gunsnet (socially liberal, fiscally conservative) and leftist members of Gunsnet (socially liberal, fiscally leftist) shouldn't have much trouble coming together on this.
It's Gunsnet's authoritarian conservatives (socially conservative, fiscally conservative) whose little faces are glum.
Kadmos
12-22-2010, 02:14 PM
Fox News hasn't a good reputation in Britain. Glenn Beck, for example, is seen as hysterical, ignorant, stupid and probably certifiable.
Quite a number of Americans hold the same opinion of him.
The actual "news" part of Fox news isn't that bad, espically when one considers the generally low quality of the art these days. BBC news is hardly what it once was either
American Rage
12-22-2010, 02:21 PM
Fox News hasn't a good reputation in Britain. Glenn Beck, for example, is seen as hysterical, ignorant, stupid and probably certifiable. But please, link to McConnell and I'll take a look.
As someone who double majored in both history and political science, I have read and watched the left for years. In my opinion, Glenn Beck is the most honest man on TV. All one has to do is read the rhetoric of the left, watch what they do, and then come to thier own conclusions.
For the record, England suffers from the exact myopia that America suffers from. Specifically, the universities have all been taken over by the left, and as a result the countries populations are less educated and more indoctrinated than they realize. Notice, this indoctrination is completely one-sided in favor of the left and global marxism.
Rage
American Rage
12-22-2010, 02:23 PM
As others have said above, right-wing libertarian members of Gunsnet (socially liberal, fiscally conservative) and leftist members of Gunsnet (socially liberal, fiscally leftist) shouldn't have much trouble coming together on this.
It's Gunsnet's authoritarian conservatives (socially conservative, fiscally conservative) whose little faces are glum.
Actually, kicking communist ass brings a warmth to my soul.
Rage
As someone who double majored in both history and political science, I have read and watched the left for years. In my opinion, Glenn Beck is the most honest man on TV. All one has to do is read the rhetoric of the left, watch what they do, and then come to thier own conclusions.
Rage, you seem to vulnerable to just as much conservative-rhetoric as you are observant of the leftist rhetoric. There are no honest people in journalism. It's a shame that your education hasn't made you aware of this fact.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIXh9nlYnuc
If you ignore some of the marxist rhetoric you see my point.
El Jefe
12-22-2010, 04:15 PM
I always find it amusing that like Canadians, many Euro types, seem to have more interest in what happens in the US, than they do in their own lands. It's weird really.
:loser:
Fox News hasn't a good reputation in Britain. Glenn Beck, for example, is seen as hysterical, ignorant, stupid and probably certifiable. But please, link to McConnell and I'll take a look.
Well, the interview was live and it wasn't Glenn Beck so I don't have a link. Too bad as it wasn't kneeling in awe of 0bama it won't be on the networks favored in Britain.
Mr. Rodgers
12-22-2010, 05:48 PM
First off, I know fags that could kick the ass out many of this membership.
Most Western Militaries actually allow openly gay people to serve in their ranks... However... Here is a list of nations that do not....
1) Iran
2) North Korea
3) Cuba
4) China
5) Vietnam
6) Laos
7) Belarus
8) Libya
9) Sudan
10) Zimbabwe
11) Venezuela
12) Myanmar (Burma)
13) Saudi Arabia
14) Syria
15) Azerbaijan
16) Kuwait (questionable)
17) United States
Notice anything about that list? Cause right now we are on it. I did not think these country’s agreed with us on anything. What a surprise, perhaps Ally realignment is necessary.:biggrina:
As others have said above, right-wing libertarian members of Gunsnet (socially liberal, fiscally conservative) and leftist members of Gunsnet (socially liberal, fiscally leftist) shouldn't have much trouble coming together on this.
We have a failed presidency grasping for anything to keep his failed foreign and domestic policies out of the news.
It's Gunsnet's authoritarian conservatives (socially conservative, fiscally conservative) whose little faces are glum.
As you're an authoritarian socialist who talks down to others in a demeaning fashion that shouldn't be an issue for you. should it?
I did not think these country’s agreed with us on anything. What a surprise, perhaps Ally realignment is necessary.:biggrina:
Your posts play so fast and loose I wasn't sure you agreed with each other until you mentioned it.
Nimbly
12-22-2010, 06:09 PM
How can you sit there and spout Nazi comments about gays, and call it conservativeness? It is nothing but ignorance. Can anyone in the U.S. military tell me that the have any evidence (or even that they believe) that knowing another dude in the squad is gay would effect their combat effectiveness? If not, then all your doing is showing to the world what a hateful, homophobic, bigot you are. As I said in another post ’When you are being shot at, you wont care if the dude covering your ass is looking at it later’. Queers should have all the rights any other American does.
aliceinchains
12-22-2010, 06:10 PM
I always find it amusing that like Canadians, many Euro types, seem to have more interest in what happens in the US, than they do in their own lands. It's weird really.
:loser:
You hit the nail on the head with that reply.
How can you sit there and spout Nazi comments about gays, and call it conservativeness? It is nothing but ignorance. Can anyone in the U.S. military tell me that the have any evidence (or even that they believe) that knowing another dude in the squad is gay would effect their combat effectiveness? If not, then all your doing is showing to the world what a hateful, homophobic, bigot you are. As I said in another post ’When you are being shot at, you wont care if the dude covering your ass is looking at it later’. Queers should have all the rights any other American does.
Nimbly as you are obviously accusing someone of "Nazi comments" you might want to do the bold and manly thing and say who..
Or are you in the libtard sling enough mud and some of it will stick mode?
I always find it amusing that like Canadians, many Euro types, seem to have more interest in what happens in the US, than they do in their own lands. It's weird really.
:loser:
Nah. misery loves company is an old saying...
They are miserable and want company.
Oliver North commented that after seeing the Four Six Royals kick ass he was amazed such a weak bunch of socialists could raise real warriors as the Four Six Royals..
Kadmos
12-22-2010, 06:19 PM
I always find it amusing that like Canadians, many Euro types, seem to have more interest in what happens in the US, than they do in their own lands. It's weird really.
No, Not really. We are a superpower. We have the ability to pretty much wipe anyone else off the map. We have the cash to economically destroy other nations that way. And we have the political ability to turn most of the world to our will.
We also have the attitude that on occasion makes us look like an insane country on the brink of civil war.
We absolutely terrify them.
Nimbly
12-22-2010, 06:22 PM
Nimbly as you are obviously accusing someone of "Nazi comments" you might want to do the bold and manly thing and say who..
Or are you in the libtard sling enough mud and some of it will stick mode?
Mostly the guy that started the thread. And anyone who accuses someone who supports human rights (gay or otherwise) a liberal. I am not a liberal, and in all reality I don't see how anyone thinks this will have any baring on the function of the Military.
Mr. Rodgers
12-22-2010, 07:05 PM
How can you sit there and spout Nazi comments about gays, and call it conservativeness? It is nothing but ignorance. Can anyone in the U.S. military tell me that the have any evidence (or even that they believe) that knowing another dude in the squad is gay would effect their combat effectiveness? If not, then all your doing is showing to the world what a hateful, homophobic, bigot you are. As I said in another post ’When you are being shot at, you wont care if the dude covering your ass is looking at it later’. Queers should have all the rights any other American does.
I have no idea to whom you are directing your post. Anyway, I was unaware of any Nazis commentators here, kindly point them out. Historically socialists have slaughtered more people than so called conservatives have. As to how a squad’s combat effectiveness is strengthened or weakened by the presence of gay’s remains to be seen. Historically, civilizations that have tolerated acts and life styles contrary to the natural order of things destroyed themselves and disappeared.
I have to take exception to your comment that people will not care if another dude (as you put it) that’s watching your 6 is looking at your ass later. There are many who will, including me. I would be most reluctant to perform CPR or other life saving measures on a man who I knew to be homosexual. I have no idea where his mouth has been and could cause some considerable speculation.
I do agree homosexuals enjoy the same rights I do. Practical necessity forces the military to behave in a most undemocratic manner as a matter of survival.
Dr. Gonzo GED
12-22-2010, 07:12 PM
Fox News hasn't a good reputation in Britain. Glenn Beck, for example, is seen as hysterical, ignorant, stupid and probably certifiable.
Interesting. You have a similar reputation here.
Are you and Beck friends?
samiam
12-22-2010, 07:18 PM
the military will survive this just like they have survived other changes in the past, bayonet charges to marksmanship, muzzle to breech loader, horse drawn to engine powered transport, integration, women in harms way, they probably still have lectures on adapt/improvise at the service academies . . sure there will be some current service members that will not re-up as a result of this, but they will be the execption not the rule, and just as a historical reference point back in the '92 election Perot (rich, white, conservative, Texan) advocated what today has become law (but he was a kook, right?) and we could have spent the last nearly 20 years on political discourse that actually mattered
Dr. Gonzo GED
12-22-2010, 07:20 PM
Historically, civilizations that have tolerated acts and life styles contrary to the natural order of things destroyed themselves and disappeared.
I'm going to have to point out a couple things here. First off, those civilizations disappear weather or not homosexuality is tolerated. Rome lasted ten times as long as us, and they were all about the man ass. To a bizarre degree by the standards of our era. The third law of thermodynamics indicates that a systems entropy increases relative to it;s complexity. Societies are exceedingly complex, and all will succumb to entropy on a long enough time line. Not faggotry necessary.
As for the efficacy of a gay fighting force? I'd like to point out that one of the most fearsome military oligarchies of all time, and universally respected martial societies, "Sparta" (maybe you've heard of them...), had a compulsory army made up exclusively of men who had sex with each other.
Honestly, the idea of a bunch of roid raged butt bandits coming over the hill all hell bent for leather scares me a lot more than some nice Christians with old school family values looking to win the ol' hearts and minds.
Uncle Scary
12-22-2010, 07:29 PM
For the record, England suffers from the exact myopia that America suffers from. Specifically, the universities have all been taken over by the left,
Not counting military academies, when have places of higher learning not been left of center? Either liberals are drawn to academia, or intellectuals tend to be more liberal than the general population.
We have the cash to economically destroy other nations that way.
We had the cash; did you miss 0bama's two years of marathon spending; on a scale unmatched by the past how many presidents?
And we have the political ability to turn most of the world to our will.
Again we had; now we had a failure at G20, failure to negotiate a deal with Beijing, a failure in the Middle East..
We also have the attitude that on occasion makes us look like an insane country on the brink of civil war.
True, as 0bama's reign has taken the same deaf ears direction as King George's; you have a point.
We absolutely terrify them.
As we haven't done anything except fight in their wars, undo their messes (Afghanistan), get stuck with their nation building (Israel etc), their meddling (India-Pakistan), therape of Central and South America etc. They scare the shit out of us and we have more reasons to be scared.
Look at the damage the Euros did to the world.
Oooops, was I supposed to apologize for America here??
63DH8
12-22-2010, 09:04 PM
Honestly, the idea of a bunch of roid raged butt bandits coming over the hill all hell bent for leather scares me a lot more than some nice Christians with old school family values looking to win the ol' hearts and minds.
You've never hear of "Onward Christian Soldiers" and "Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition"? :coffee:
Dr. Gonzo GED
12-22-2010, 09:30 PM
You've never hear of "Onward Christian Soldiers" and "Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition"? :coffee:
If I "had" to pick between the two, I think I'd rather be shot by a WASP, than raped by an army of slave driving heathen super-fags. But that's just me... ;)
American Rage
12-22-2010, 09:32 PM
Rage, you seem to vulnerable to just as much conservative-rhetoric as you are observant of the leftist rhetoric. There are no honest people in journalism. It's a shame that your education hasn't made you aware of this fact.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIXh9nlYnuc
If you ignore some of the marxist rhetoric you see my point.
I'm aware that the press has been controlled by the left for generations. I'm aware that the Universities have been controlled by the left for generations. I'm again aware of the huge propaganda machine that has resulted due to the collusion of the two mentioned above. I'm also very aware of what the left has stated, preached, and acted upon for generations. So forgive and excuse me if I let a few upstart rightwing, fighting back for the 1st time since the Raw Deal, voices be forgiven for a mistake or two, or even three.
No where does this compare to the outright treachery dished out by the left's propaganda machine for at least 75 years, that I definitely know of. In the end, you can always argue history, if you know it. But one can never argue the math. And I suspect that it's the math that is always the deciding factor as to future probabilities.
And yes, that very math has stated that from the beginning socialism was doomed to failure!
Rage
Charliebravo
12-22-2010, 11:24 PM
This whole mess has fuck-all to do with an effective fighting force and everything to do with BENEFITS. Mark my words, once DADT is repealed, the first thing that will happen is that a soldier will take his weekend pass and his jizz-receptacle-of-the-week to Massachussetts to get hitched. He will then return and demand (and receive) the right to put his "husband" on full military benefits. Once word gets around, the sword-swallowers will be showing up at the recruiting offices in droves. Not out love of country or the desire to serve, but the ability get get benefits for their rope-smoker.
American Rage
12-23-2010, 12:25 AM
This whole mess has fuck-all to do with an effective fighting force and everything to do with BENEFITS. Mark my words, once DADT is repealed, the first thing that will happen is that a soldier will take his weekend pass and his jizz-receptacle-of-the-week to Massachussetts to get hitched. He will then return and demand (and receive) the right to put his "husband" on full military benefits. Once word gets around, the sword-swallowers will be showing up at the recruiting offices in droves. Not out love of country or the desire to serve, but the ability get get benefits for their rope-smoker.
Exactly!
Rage
Kadmos
12-23-2010, 12:54 AM
This whole mess has fuck-all to do with an effective fighting force and everything to do with BENEFITS. Mark my words, once DADT is repealed, the first thing that will happen is that a soldier will take his weekend pass and his jizz-receptacle-of-the-week to Massachussetts to get hitched. He will then return and demand (and receive) the right to put his "husband" on full military benefits. Once word gets around, the sword-swallowers will be showing up at the recruiting offices in droves. Not out love of country or the desire to serve, but the ability get get benefits for their rope-smoker.
So what?
If a soldier is entitled to benefits for their family, then I believe they have earned them..what does it matter what gender the person waiting at home is?
If you don't think spouses deserve benefits at all, well fine I guess that's a reasonable opinion, personally I'm ok with helping to take care of our soldier's families...but I don't think I should have any say in who they chose to call their family.
Most companies that have benefits have them for domestic partners as well, why should the military do differently?
I always find it amusing that like Canadians, many Euro types, seem to have more interest in what happens in the US, than they do in their own lands. It's weird really.
:loser:
You are funny Jeffrey. Yanks aren't the only people I talk to on the internet. It's a big world out there. G'wan! Stop shivering on a pile of guns in....
http://vacations.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/odd-towns-cut-n-shoot.jpg
... and meet some new people. They're not all scary A-rabs with beards seeking to blow up your grits.
http://vacations.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/odd-towns-cut-n-shoot.jpg
... and meet some new people. They're not all scary A-rabs with beards seeking to blow up your grits.
Their crime statistics are almost non-existent.. Rather interesting, eh?
Their crime statistics are almost non-existent.. Rather interesting, eh?
Yes indeedy. Seeing as they spend their time cutting amphetamines and shooting up.
Yes indeedy. Seeing as they spend their time cutting amphetamines and shooting up.
It is located in Texas, not London.
Can't you tell by the low crime rate?
...gniht doog a si suoivilbo yllatot dna degnellahc yllatnem eht pleh ot gnihtynA
....pleh dluow sdrawkcab ssa txet eht htiw gnitsop fi gnirednow saw I ;sdrawkcab ssa gnihtyreve evah ot mees uoy sA
,yeoj
.muucav latnem eht hcaerb pleh ot knil a
http://www.backwardstext.com/Default.aspx
Dr. Gonzo GED
12-23-2010, 11:52 AM
You are funny Jeffrey. Yanks aren't the only people I talk to on the internet. It's a big world out there. G'wan! Stop shivering on a pile of guns in....
http://vacations.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/odd-towns-cut-n-shoot.jpg
... and meet some new people. They're not all scary A-rabs with beards seeking to blow up your grits.
Wow. 568 people out of 300,000,000.
You've really discovered the pulse of America there Joey!
Soooo, anybody feel like posting on topic?
63DH8
12-23-2010, 02:57 PM
You are funny Jeffrey. Yanks aren't the only people I talk to on the internet. It's a big world out there. G'wan! Stop shivering on a pile of guns in....
Joey, I thought we went over the "scared, sitting on a pile of guns things, and the compensating BS.
You're having penis envy; We don't have to fear as we're the ones with the firearms.
DodgeGTS
12-23-2010, 02:58 PM
We had guys shaving each others asses in the shower and spooning on FTX in my BCT platoon. (A119 Ft. Benning) This was in '06. I'm not sure how much more "out" they can get.
American Rage
12-23-2010, 03:44 PM
Sorry, double post.
Rage
American Rage
12-23-2010, 03:55 PM
[QUOTE=American Rage;78873]How about any time in recorded history prior to the philosophy of Karl Marx?
I could buy your comment more easily if the statistics weren't so one sided. This one sidedness is particularly strong in certain departments across the country: like Law, History, and Political Science. I thank God for engineers. Too bad they've been beaten by the poly sci department.
By my figures, there should be between 29% republican and 40% conservative professors on every campus in America, spread across all departments and colleges. And to have otherwise is to cheat democracy because it closes of the voice of alternative explanations, especially in History, Political Science, and Law.
And even perhaps more importantly, having 29-40% republican/conservative faculty would help act as a counterbalance to some of the crazier ideas of the 71-60% of liberal, left of liberal, and far left of liberal that would still inhabit all of our campuses countrywide. Instead, the numbers break down something like 90-99% liberal, left of liberal, and far left of liberal on virtually every campus in America.
I think it's time we look into our higher education system and ask why?
Because I argue that it is statistically impossible to have the number of "liberals" on campus that we do, unless somebody, somewhere and at some point in time began to stack the deck. Hell, I bet there are more communist in the political sci department at Berkley than republicans? And if so, that should make everybody mad as hell! To realize that American tax dollars have gone to fund elitist revolutionaries as they indoctrinate our children in thier Marxist beliefs.
But that's just me.
Rage [QUOTE]
yankeedog
12-23-2010, 05:25 PM
I don't think its fair the queers get to shower with other guys, when a strait guy can't shower with the women????
63DH8
12-23-2010, 05:42 PM
I don't think its fair the queers get to shower with other guys, when a strait guy can't shower with the women????
I'd push this as a "woman's rights" issue! :thumbsup:
F-16 CHIEF
12-23-2010, 06:58 PM
The only issue that I have is the "Open" part.
Look, if you choose to be gay, and it is a choice, then that's fine. It doesn't need to be part of the military day. Period.
BUT, one thing that must be remembered. If it is okay to be openly gay, then it must be okay to openly pick on them. Here's why. If some dude hooks up with and ugly fat chick. We give them h#ll over it.
Now, if some dude hooks up with a flamer, and tells us, we'll run a risk of getting kicked out of the military because we mess with them. It doesn't even have to be in a hateful way.
What this decision does is censor and mute anyone who disapproves of the act. It stops even good natured ribbing of people. It will damage unit cohesion. I promise it will. Now, besides walking on egg shells when mentioning a black person, or a woman, we can now have to not dare make a statement about a homo. Disaster. Censored disaster.
BUT. Screw it. I have 3 years left. The military has become a PC joke. It's wrong to say anything that even hints towards racism, sexism, or homo's. EVEN, if it's true. The military is more PC than any big coroporation.
F-16 CHIEF
12-23-2010, 07:02 PM
This whole mess has fuck-all to do with an effective fighting force and everything to do with BENEFITS. Mark my words, once DADT is repealed, the first thing that will happen is that a soldier will take his weekend pass and his jizz-receptacle-of-the-week to Massachussetts to get hitched. He will then return and demand (and receive) the right to put his "husband" on full military benefits. Once word gets around, the sword-swallowers will be showing up at the recruiting offices in droves. Not out love of country or the desire to serve, but the ability get get benefits for their rope-smoker.
DING DING!!!!
Not only does the non-soldier not get it, but the average liberal has no clue, what this will cost. BAS and BAQ will sky rocket. The military will soon be forced to recognize this union. It will cost the US billions.
yankeedog
12-23-2010, 08:19 PM
I'd push this as a "woman's rights" issue! :thumbsup:
Its always someone else, never the strait guy!!!!!
daemon734
12-24-2010, 01:07 AM
A few years ago, there was a report about boot camp recruits being given "stress cards"... the purpose of the cards was for the recruit to pull it out if he couldn't take the drill sargent yelling/cussing at him/her...
Do they still distribute those cards?
Snopes says this is a myth and not true... but on the military forums, there are reports that they were indeed used.
It was a trial program for Navy boot camp in the mid 90's that did not last more than a couple cycles.
First it was allowing females to serve in combat roles, now it's allowing open gayness!
Curious, when were women allowed in combat arms? They are only allowed in combat support roles.
Mark my words, once DADT is repealed, the first thing that will happen is that a soldier will take his weekend pass and his jizz-receptacle-of-the-week to Massachussetts to get hitched. He will then return and demand (and receive) the right to put his "husband" on full military benefits.
convenience marriages have always been the case in the military anyway. Why is somebody going to set social suicide upon themselves to gay marry for bennies when there are plenty of females lined up to do it?
As far as the thread title, "the pussification of the US military".....right now there are homosexuals carrying M240's over mountaintops at 10,000' of elevation right into the face of the enemy, standing alongside the straight troops. The US military is FAR from pussified, regardless of any variable you come up with. To me, the pussy title goes to the guy who isn't going through that but has the balls to complain about it.
F-16 CHIEF
12-24-2010, 02:23 AM
convenience marriages have always been the case in the military anyway. Why is somebody going to set social suicide upon themselves to gay marry for bennies when there are plenty of females lined up to do it?
That's an easy one. There were plenty of colleges to go to, but a certain girl had to go to VMI and get the 100+ year history of that school changed. It's a social movement. Just like that one back in the 90's, this one will be the same. The soldier will make a statement. Someone will want attention and want to be the first.
daemon734
12-24-2010, 02:51 AM
That's an easy one. There were plenty of colleges to go to, but a certain girl had to go to VMI and get the 100+ year history of that school changed. It's a social movement. Just like that one back in the 90's, this one will be the same. The soldier will make a statement. Someone will want attention and want to be the first.
I agree that somebody will definitely do it, but I really don't see it being a huge movement equating billions of dollars. It just doesn't make sense, a large percentage of troops simply will not declare themselves gay for BAH, especially when they can get the exact same benefits through a marriage of convenience to some stripper and avoid the inevitable stigma from their peers.
In the end nothing much will change. If gays have to shower with other guys, where do you think they shower now? Besides, I haven't been in a group shower since basic. Deployment shower trailers and even post gyms have individual stalls now.
daemon734
12-24-2010, 02:52 AM
Thank you, government computer, for the double post.
F-16 CHIEF
12-24-2010, 12:06 PM
I agree that somebody will definitely do it, but I really don't see it being a huge movement equating billions of dollars. It just doesn't make sense, a large percentage of troops simply will not declare themselves gay for BAH, especially when they can get the exact same benefits through a marriage of convenience to some stripper and avoid the inevitable stigma from their peers.
In the end nothing much will change. If gays have to shower with other guys, where do you think they shower now? Besides, I haven't been in a group shower since basic. Deployment shower trailers and even post gyms have individual stalls now.
I agree that the procedural part won't change. But, you and I will be going to classes about tolerance. All gay jokes will now be grounds for article 15's. Plus, there's not going to be a mad rush for BAS and BAQ, but I think that over time, it will end up costing the US billions. People won't understand where the extra costs will come from, but it should be obvious.
And, anybody who get private showers and stalls sucks! :) The last time I was in the desert, we had nasty open everything. Lived in tents. Had to share bathroom with the Brits, who apparently, have no problem walking around naked, regardless of age, or physical conditioning.
matshock
12-24-2010, 12:57 PM
I agree that the procedural part won't change. But, you and I will be going to classes about tolerance. All gay jokes will now be grounds for article 15's. Plus, there's not going to be a mad rush for BAS and BAQ, but I think that over time, it will end up costing the US billions. People won't understand where the extra costs will come from, but it should be obvious.
And, anybody who get private showers and stalls sucks! :) The last time I was in the desert, we had nasty open everything. Lived in tents. Had to share bathroom with the Brits, who apparently, have no problem walking around naked, regardless of age, or physical conditioning.
We play "spot the Brit" at the pools here in Vegas- it's always the 300 lb guy in the Speedo.
Dr. Gonzo GED
12-28-2010, 03:50 AM
We had guys shaving each others asses in the shower and spooning on FTX in my BCT platoon. (A119 Ft. Benning) This was in '06. I'm not sure how much more "out" they can get.
Guess nobody bothered to ask...
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.