PLEASE ACCEPT MY IMMEDIATE RESIGNATION FROM THIS FORUM. i HAVE ENCOUNTERED SOME REASONABLE INDIVIDUALS BUT THERE ARE TOO MANY INDIVIDUALS LACKING ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE WITHOUT LANGUAGE THAT i CONSIDER OFFENSIVE AND SOME EVEN IMMORAL. the CURRENT THREAD HAS BEEN DETERMINED IN LAW AND THE COURTS AND THERE ARE MORE MEANINGFUL MILITARY ARTS AND SCIENCE SUBJECTS MORE PRESSING. lastly MEMBERSHIP NEEDS TO BE EXPANDED OR THE ORGANIZATION TRASHED. many OF THE CONTRIBUTORS DISPLAY THE IGNORANCE, SMALL MIND, LACK OF ADEQUATE MILITARY CREDENTIALS AND EVEN LACK OF WIDE LIFE EXPERIENCE AND STUDY TO COMMENT, E.G. ARE unredeemable BIGOTS WHEN THE HAVE P-PONTIFICATED ON THE LAST SUBJECT OF dadt. Excuse yhe lack of corrections but my hands do work well from combat injuries and poisoning. Those most angered should wash their mouths out with soap and go back to school. I have served with men and women in an active combat division as well in training. There were good and bad males, good and bad gays and good and bad MEN. as a 1, 2. 3, 4, 5 in staffs AND 3 COMMANDS, AS CO, with a pile of medals as testament of my metal, devotion to duty and patriotism as an infantry officer, I'll MAKE IT SIMPLE. I'd RATHER HAVE AN Average GAY OR WOMAN ANY DAY VERSUS A MEDIOCRE MALE OR TOO OFTEN WORSE, an NCO or officer who THINKS HE KNOWS IT ALL but thinking, performing substandard or a bigot. Last,the Army has been unable to fill the ranks without women and now also will need gays because there won't be enough 'straight' men. Women have already proved themselves both in training and combat. The last two sentences are not mine originally but they could have been because they are true. They come out of observations and conclusions at the top of the Army and DOD. (You cannot judge a creature by a hair or flea on its back or the smell of a certain aperture.) I invite all contributors, dissenters, to read more than the local newspaper or examine from whom they learned some of the values they have acquired. If this letter looks poorly prepared, poorly typed it looks perfect, beautiful next to what I have seen contained in some of the letters and comments I have read herein. I won't be part of it. Equal treatment of women, now gays is not about what one person needs. It's about what the Army, DOD and this country need to preserve this nation. God save America. Excuse me, I must rest now.
If you are in the military or have been how do you feel about Don't Ask Don't Tell?
Botak
Active member
Look I can see how this is a contentious issue. Maybe I'd feel stronger about it if I was in the US Military and not the ADF.
And I'm not going to pretend I've been in an environment where I've had to trust someone with my life.
Having said that, in nine years I've rarely gotten into a conversation with a mate in the same gunpit where sexuality even came up. I still think the job (and getting everyone through doing that job in one piece) is what's important... I really don't see how someone's preference as to which type of genitals they like to fiddle with is going to change that. I can't see a situation where I'll consider a section- or brick-mate's straightness or gayness more important than whether their IAs with a LSW are up to scratch, or whether I can count on them to move the right way and maintain slick muzzle discipline during a break contact drill...
When I put on the green, I care foremost about doing my job properly - not letting myself down, not letting my mates down. If the other three guys in my brick are covering their arcs and doing their jobs, that's all I need to know and all the trust I need to invest. What they do in their spare time after we go our seperate ways from the OR's Mess is their business. Me, I go back to my smokin wife, but then that's my choice coz I like Boobs. :mrgreen:
And I'm not going to pretend I've been in an environment where I've had to trust someone with my life.
Having said that, in nine years I've rarely gotten into a conversation with a mate in the same gunpit where sexuality even came up. I still think the job (and getting everyone through doing that job in one piece) is what's important... I really don't see how someone's preference as to which type of genitals they like to fiddle with is going to change that. I can't see a situation where I'll consider a section- or brick-mate's straightness or gayness more important than whether their IAs with a LSW are up to scratch, or whether I can count on them to move the right way and maintain slick muzzle discipline during a break contact drill...
When I put on the green, I care foremost about doing my job properly - not letting myself down, not letting my mates down. If the other three guys in my brick are covering their arcs and doing their jobs, that's all I need to know and all the trust I need to invest. What they do in their spare time after we go our seperate ways from the OR's Mess is their business. Me, I go back to my smokin wife, but then that's my choice coz I like Boobs. :mrgreen:
Last edited:
Spartan613
Active member
Hasn't been a problem in the ADF.
Australia de-criminalised homosexuality in the Defence Force decades ago. Despite warnings that the sky would fall, it hasn't made a bit of difference to ADF operational capability. I've been in units, or worked in areas, where there were openly gay men and women, and it didn't change a single thing about how we operated and go the job done.
Australia de-criminalised homosexuality in the Defence Force decades ago. Despite warnings that the sky would fall, it hasn't made a bit of difference to ADF operational capability. I've been in units, or worked in areas, where there were openly gay men and women, and it didn't change a single thing about how we operated and go the job done.
AFAIC, they can be any gender. I. Don't. Care. DADT is there for a reason. If they trust me enough to tell me, I'll respect them for that. If they hit up on me, they're dead. So long as they can perform their jobs and functions as well or better than the heteorsexual community I do not feel they should face any penalties.
coughcough
You have SIX posts. SIX. Not SIXteen. Not SIXty. And definitely not SIX hundred. Six.
On top of that you have been here since..... December 3rd of last year. 49 days.
And then you claim to be a retired LTC.
Listen, rank of that level would mean you have the training and experience with "others" to understand that what you see on the surface means little to what is in side. If you got to know these hoodlums, rankles, curtain climbers, pests and trolls (not including the typical members, of course), your opinion would be quite different.
But since you are retired (allegedly), you have no obligation to hang out with us. And that is fine. But you, being a trained professional, IS expected to withhold such judgements until you know what the whole scoop is. Unfortunate for you that you won't know the value of the fine ladies and gentlemen we have here.
You. Resign. Ooook.
coughcough
You have SIX posts. SIX. Not SIXteen. Not SIXty. And definitely not SIX hundred. Six.
On top of that you have been here since..... December 3rd of last year. 49 days.
And then you claim to be a retired LTC.
Listen, rank of that level would mean you have the training and experience with "others" to understand that what you see on the surface means little to what is in side. If you got to know these hoodlums, rankles, curtain climbers, pests and trolls (not including the typical members, of course), your opinion would be quite different.
But since you are retired (allegedly), you have no obligation to hang out with us. And that is fine. But you, being a trained professional, IS expected to withhold such judgements until you know what the whole scoop is. Unfortunate for you that you won't know the value of the fine ladies and gentlemen we have here.
You're OBVIOUSLY a smart guy. That you made plain. You also have plenty of experience. I have, what, two posts? And I'm not even military. I don't pretend to be. I'm just a normal dude, going to school. I agree with most of your points. The only place you lost me was when you said DADT was there for a reason. What reason is that? To protect gay soldiers? What do they need protection from?
________________________
"You need a Maglite and a gun; the rest is skill."
Last edited:
And you are.....? What? Listen, a problem I have seen in the civilian community is when a gay will tell people he's gay, and then he gets his ass kicked. THEN he whines it's because of his gender. No, not really. It's because he flapped his gums about something no one cares about. You don't see straight soldiers going into the barracks telling folks "I'm a heterosexual!", do you? NO! But somehow the gays feel they have to go around all of God' creation bragging about being gay. Hey, if that floats their boat, I'm happy for them. But until they tell others, no one really cares. And by the time their buddies find out, odds are they already earned enough respect that theiur buddies don't really care.
If the gays want to blend in, all they have to do is STFU. We don't need to know if they bang girls or bang boys, nor do we care.
GHR
Active member
From our reactions!
In a combat unit it's all about acceptance and confidence and nothing else. And it doesn’t matter whether you are a redhead or gay. We either like you or not. But you can just keep your mouth shut that you sleep with men; if you can live with that.
Last edited:
mmarsh
Active member
Hmmm,
From what I have heard the biggest fear gays in the service have is being found out and having their careers torpedoed because of it. DADT was supposed to end "don't ask", but the truth was the military was still hunting and persecuting any gays they could find, even though such practice was technically forbidden.
I suspect the reasons those individuals confessed their sexuality was not because they felt like sharing it with the world, but because they didn't want to live in fear anymore. Imagine living in Nazi Germany and having to hid Jewish heritage. (Yes I know the comparison is not the same level of degree, but you see my point). Carrying such big secrets and not being able to let go can be a very heavy burden to bear on ones conscience.
I suspect that once the military formerly drops excluding gays from the service, you will not have people "coming out" as much. I work with gay people at my office, they don't regularly advertise their sexuality although they don't keep it absolute secret either.
brinktk
Active member
Awfully dramatic considering you have barely had any correspondence on this site.
Oddball
Active member
I've got your number ducky.
But you couldn't afford me, dear. ;-)
I think this about sums it up for you Combat Arms types who insist that you're different...
Also, for the record, there are gays who would not perform well in a military environment just as there are straights who wouldn't. The image of the "flaming queer" is not as all-encompassing as you seem to think. There are plenty of people who are gay that you would honestly not be able to identify as such without being told.
Think we are different ........?
You have much experience with CA units...?
c/Commander
Active member
Everyone thinks they're different and special. Best policy I've figured out is to assume that you're not.
And the artist who made that comment was an 0311...
And the artist who made that comment was an 0311...
Last edited:
ObjSRgtLw
Active member
To my mind homosexuality isn't a big problem in the German Federal Armed Forces. We had one guy at the Infantry School who tried to hide it but one day he just gave in and told us, but because he was a good soldier no one judged and there wasn't a problem. On the other side, the punishment for saying anything negative about homosexuals (or women) is very high, so I personally just don't say anything about them before I burn my hands- women and homosexuals may do as they like- I'll train my soldiers and try to stay out of the left-liberal fire.
Oddball
Active member
Well! if you've never been in jail then it's not easy knowing what color the wall is.
Think you guys will never understand! And yes I am ambivalent. Most people are.
muscogeemike
Active member
25 years in the Army. I am not gay and I just don’t care who is. Do your job and you are OK with me. The finest officer I ever served with may well have been gay, it didn’t make him less of a soldier.
Throughout history there have been homosexuals in the military. Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar (well, he was bi-sexual), The entire Spartan army, etc. Obviously these were some pretty fine fighting men and leaders.
I was in the military before DADT when it was just plain against regulations to be homosexual. Did that stop gays from enlisting and serving? Of course not.
DADT made it easier for homosexuals to enlist in the military, but they did so with the understanding that overt homosexual conduct while serving was forbidden. They agreed to abide by the regulations when they signed their contracts and took the oath. In short, they swore to abide by the rules when in uniform, on duty. What they did on liberty or leave was their own business as long as they didn't bring it back to base with them. Many of these individuals choose to abide by the rules and go on to have exemplary military careers.
Since Slick Willie Clinton instituted DATD there have been approximately 14,000 discharges handed out for homosexuality. Compared to the number of enlistments since 1993 this is a very small percentage. In fact, it is probably a small percentage ot the total number of homosexuals who have enlisted from then to now.
However, a number of those discharged clearly joined to challenge the system and act as activist agents of change. You know who they were because they got alot of sympathetic media coverage for about 15 minutes when they were kicked out.
These gay activists want to throw the military wide open to overtly gay enlistment, they want medical, base housing, dependent ID cards and survivor benefits for their "partners." They want to take their same gender husband/wife (however they sort that out) to the anniversary ball of their respective service, and have them see them off on deployment and welcome them home with hugs and kisses just like heterosexual military members.
Can anybody see how this might be contrary to proper military discipline, order and morale? I can. Despite the fact that homosexuals have always served in the military of every country, kingdom, empire throughout history, they have never been the majority (except maybe Sparta.) Institutions that cater to the minority at the expense of the majority make huge problems for themselves.
Despite Mr. Obama's desire to cater to the gay constituency, the leadership of the military is quite right to refuse to become a haven for alternative lifestyles.
I was in the military before DADT when it was just plain against regulations to be homosexual. Did that stop gays from enlisting and serving? Of course not.
DADT made it easier for homosexuals to enlist in the military, but they did so with the understanding that overt homosexual conduct while serving was forbidden. They agreed to abide by the regulations when they signed their contracts and took the oath. In short, they swore to abide by the rules when in uniform, on duty. What they did on liberty or leave was their own business as long as they didn't bring it back to base with them. Many of these individuals choose to abide by the rules and go on to have exemplary military careers.
Since Slick Willie Clinton instituted DATD there have been approximately 14,000 discharges handed out for homosexuality. Compared to the number of enlistments since 1993 this is a very small percentage. In fact, it is probably a small percentage ot the total number of homosexuals who have enlisted from then to now.
However, a number of those discharged clearly joined to challenge the system and act as activist agents of change. You know who they were because they got alot of sympathetic media coverage for about 15 minutes when they were kicked out.
These gay activists want to throw the military wide open to overtly gay enlistment, they want medical, base housing, dependent ID cards and survivor benefits for their "partners." They want to take their same gender husband/wife (however they sort that out) to the anniversary ball of their respective service, and have them see them off on deployment and welcome them home with hugs and kisses just like heterosexual military members.
Can anybody see how this might be contrary to proper military discipline, order and morale? I can. Despite the fact that homosexuals have always served in the military of every country, kingdom, empire throughout history, they have never been the majority (except maybe Sparta.) Institutions that cater to the minority at the expense of the majority make huge problems for themselves.
Despite Mr. Obama's desire to cater to the gay constituency, the leadership of the military is quite right to refuse to become a haven for alternative lifestyles.
Last edited:
