an ultimatum

Having served three decades in the military I have the utmost respect for the establishment and the traditional warfighters who have served there for more than two centuries. My issue lies with forcing personnel who don't fit into military jobs that require serious cohesion in the interest of social experimentation. I wouldn't expect the average liberal to understand this as they have never (and will never) serve in the military, but a combat unit is no place for social experiments. When a social experiment goes wrong at some department store or government office some feelings get hurt and maybe someone gets fired or transferred. When a social experiment goes wrong in a combat operation, people die.

Small unit tactics in combat units depend on serious cohesion and trust. That cohesion and trust is tested significantly when you try to push gay men (or women for that matter) into jobs that have been traditionally filled by young, heterosexual men. (I can say this now that I'm no longer in the military) Again, if you read about combat operations in a book once...you will NEVER get this concept. If you have served...then you likely understand my rant about the Queen Berets.

The generals and admirals who are giving these new ideas a north south are doing so to preserve their own jobs (and necks) under the current regime. Placing openly gay people or women in combat duties in the military is a bad idea and will have serious consequences for our military readiness and will limit our ability, as a nation, to respond to difficult situations like the one unfolding in Egypt and the Middle East.

I know, you don't get it, but you will be astonished when the congressional hearings begin about gays or women being abused in combat units. People will be scratching their heads and wondering why. I'm telling you why right now.

We can let the young men who have traditionally fought in these front line units learn how to understand and appreciate gays when they leave the military and get that job at Walmart. In the meantime....we are playing with fire here.

I really don't care about the gay lifestyle otherwise...and I know gays have served quietly in the military for a very long time...I just know that forcing openly gay people into combat units is a really bad idea. But don't take my word...watch what happens over the next decade or so.

Good points LH.

While using the military as a social experiment has worked, like integrating African-Americans, sometimes it is very painful and doesn't work out. Countries that used women in combat roles like the USSR and Israel, eventually went back to men only units.
Personally I hope homosexuals being out won't hurt combat effectiveness, I am glad that this was done when we were winding down foreign operations instead of ramping up.

FredHayek wrote: Good points LH.

While using the military as a social experiment has worked, like integrating African-Americans, sometimes it is very painful and doesn't work out. Countries that used women in combat roles like the USSR and Israel, eventually went back to men only units.
Personally I hope homosexuals being out won't hurt combat effectiveness, I am glad that this was done when we were winding down foreign operations instead of ramping up.

Agreed. At the time I know that integrating African-Americans into combat units was a big deal, but at the end of the day the two men sharing very tight quarters in a fighting position were of the same sex and same sexual orientation. Now let's put an openly gay man (or young woman) in that same foxhole. And I'm not talking about for a half hour photo opportunity in some glossy magazine....I'm talking for hours, days and weeks at a time. Throw in some youthful hormones, hours of boredom and loneliness...and walla...you have a recipe for trouble. Combat is tough enough on a good day...why the hell would we want to make the whole thing that much harder?

Again, most don't and won't get it.

And the main reason they are now allowing women into combat units is women officers believe they face a glass ceiling because they don't have combat ribbons.

FredHayek wrote: OK, here I go. Homosexuals have fought bravely for America covertly for centuries. And it isn't complete disrespect, just disrespect for some members. And you are right about us jumping on liberals disrespecting the military, like those lefties who spit on returning Vietnam vets, or those progressive colleges that want to deny educations to ROTC students.

Too bad it didn't happen:

Myth Making and Spitting Images from Vietnam


MEDIA MYTH: Vietnam Vets and Spit

There's no real proof that anti-war people spit on Vietnam Veterans. In fact, the anti-war movement welcomed veterans and felt a lot of sympathy for them.

However, there is actual proof that Republican Delegates to the Republican National Convention did spit on our anti-war veterans. When will they apologize for this?

You can repeat it as often as you like...It still doesn't make it true.

Calling Vietnam Vets baby killers was just a myth? John Kerry throwing his comrades under the bus when he was running as an anti-war candidate?

The Left has become ashamed of the way they treated returning vets so now they are trying to whitewash and cover it up. The liberal spin patrol is out again.

Can you find a legitimate source next time? Not Pravda or Mother Jones?

Oh, so now you want to change the subject from "spitting on returning vets" (which didn't happen) to calls of "baby-killers"... Gee, Fred, how many times do you need to change the subject to cover up the fact that you're lying again?

Sorry, "Ol' Fact-Free, Source-Free, Link-Free" Fred, you don't get to ask me for sources you approve of when you NEVER give ANY of your own.

LadyJazzer wrote: Oh, so now you want to change the subject from "spitting on returning vets" (which didn't happen) to calls of "baby-killers"... Gee, Fred, how many times do you need to change the subject to cover up the fact that you're lying again?

Sorry, "Ol' Fact-Free, Source-Free, Link-Free" Fred, you don't get to ask me for sources you approve of when you NEVER give ANY of your own.

So you admit you can't find the anti-spitting stuff in a legitimate source? And you agree that Kerry did throw his comrades under the bus. And that anti-war protestors did call returning vets baby killers? And you didn't challenge the other part of my post, did you?

Can't find that evidence that colleges didn't try to deny ROTC on campus? You would think they would want to influence the young officers of this nation with liberal ideas.

All this rhetoric from Fred to deflect from a conservative disrespecting our troops... Right here, right now, not over 40 years ago. Nice try fred, but lionshead's posts are still disgusting.

And you are over-reacting.
The guy served and thinks homosexuals serving openly will hurt morale and possibly kill troops.
He takes a comic tone like a political cartoon, and because you disagree with it, you call it disgusting. I disagree with his idea but it is just an educated opinon from his service.