Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff recommends end to DADT

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2010 6:56 PM GMT
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35197645/ns/us_news-military/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2010 7:12 PM GMT
    A fucking year long study???? ...fuck that shit!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2010 7:47 PM GMT
    Caslon13000 saidA fucking year long study???? ...fuck that shit!

    Yeah, that part bothered me. I wonder if the Joint Chiefs are betting on a change of parties in Congress in 2010? Then gays in the military is shelved for another 2 years or more. Their stone-faced lack of applause when President Obama mentioned repeal of DADT during his State of the Union speech was widely noted.

    And now they claim to support it, but with a 1-year delay for study? Yeah, I suspect they're hoping the Republicans gain control of at least 1 house in Congress, after which all chance of repealing DADT will be dead, since it requires major legislative changes to US Code to accomplish.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Feb 02, 2010 8:01 PM GMT
    They're already floating a "relaxed" version of DADT icon_neutral.gif

  • AirForceGuy75

    Posts: 51

    Feb 02, 2010 8:53 PM GMT
    Well, the interesting fact is that our military is one of the only militarizes that don't actually allow gays in openly. All of our Allies allow gays to openly serve even the Jews. The one Military if you want to call them a military that don't allow gays into their military and they aren't even our Allies is the Muslim groups in Iraq and Afghanistan that we fight on a daily bases....imagine that. People wanted to find something in common with those we call terrorists now they have it.....praise be to our government and to those we fight against......
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2010 9:09 PM GMT
    ...and McCain opposes it openly.

    But Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), the ranking Republican on the panel, fired back, questioning Mullen's statement and asking that each of the chiefs' views be "on the record."

    McCain said he was "deeply disappointed" by the decision to launch the study. He called the move "clearly biased," because it presumes the law should be changed. He chastised Gates for trying to change the policy "by fiat."

    Gates later told the committee that he agreed that ultimately the policy would have to be changed by Congress. Committee Chairman Sen. Carl Levin suggested that a policy change could be accomplished as an amendment to the Defense Authorization bill.

    McCain defended the current policy, saying he was "enormously proud and thankful for every American that chooses to put on a uniform and serve."

    "Has this policy been ideal? No, it has not. But it has been effective," the Vietnam veteran and former Republican presidential nominee said. "It is well understood and predominantly supported by our fighting men and women. And it has sustained unit cohesion and unit morale, while still allowing gay and lesbian Americans to serve."
  • trl_

    Posts: 994

    Feb 02, 2010 9:33 PM GMT
    AirForceGuy75 saidWell, the interesting fact is that our military is one of the only militarizes that don't actually allow gays in openly. All of our Allies allow gays to openly serve even the Jews.


    The military is of Israel,and not all Israelis are Jews. icon_wink.gif Semantics.
    Also, I think something important to remember here is that a lot of our allies have compulsory military service, so that's why they can't/don't discriminate like we do.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2010 10:09 PM GMT
    fizzle said...Also, I think something important to remember here is that a lot of our allies have compulsory military service, so that's why they can't/don't discriminate like we do.

    Not sure your meaning there. The US prohibited gay service when we had a draft.

    Indeed, a common practice was to draft you even if you said you were gay, dismissing such a claim as a way to dodge the draft. But then, once you were in uniform, they'd dishonorably discharge you for being gay! I had a friend that happened to. Such a discharge could make you ineligible for certain federal benefits & programs, and prejudice employers from hiring you, since many would ask that question in job applications.
  • Mepark

    Posts: 806

    Feb 02, 2010 10:33 PM GMT
    Caslon13000 saidA fucking year long study???? ...fuck that shit!


    nuff complaining. We've been waiting almost two decades (not counting the centuries before that) to be able to serve openly, I think we can wait one year for an actual vote. icon_biggrin.gif
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14372

    Feb 02, 2010 10:41 PM GMT
    Hey you just can't suddenly change policies like DADT overnight. While I strongly support abolishing DADT, I also think that because the US Military is still a predominately very conservative institution we need to move slowly on implementing this long overdue initiative. Mutiny in the ranks could become a grave problem if this ban on openly gay men on the military is lifted overnight. Trust me on this one, I served in the US Army for three years and in the Army National Guard for five years. This is not going to be an easy policy to change that is for sure.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2010 10:45 PM GMT
    Caslon13000 saidA fucking year long study???? ...fuck that shit!


    Yeah that got me too.. Hopefully by that time it wont be to late.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19137

    Feb 02, 2010 11:16 PM GMT
    Red_Vespa said Yeah, I suspect they're hoping the Republicans gain control of at least 1 house in Congress, after which all chance of repealing DADT will be dead, since it requires major legislative changes to US Code to accomplish.


    Not necessarily true. Let's not forget that a Democratic President put DADT in place. Minds are slowly beginning to be opened on this subject, as well as "Gay Marriage", but it's not going to happen overnight or as quickly as we want...but it is slowly moving in the right direction. As for the military, they were interviewing many randomly today on CNN, and it was pretty split with some who were okay with it, others who were not, so let's not always use the scapegoat of blaming Republicans for everything. It is WAY more complicated than that.
  • styrgan

    Posts: 2017

    Feb 02, 2010 11:26 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said
    Red_Vespa said Yeah, I suspect they're hoping the Republicans gain control of at least 1 house in Congress, after which all chance of repealing DADT will be dead, since it requires major legislative changes to US Code to accomplish.


    Not necessarily true. Let's not forget that a Democratic President put DADT in place. Minds are slowly beginning to be opened on this subject, as well as "Gay Marriage", but it's not going to happen overnight or as quickly as we want...but it is slowly moving in the right direction. As for the military, they were interviewing many randomly today on CNN, and it was pretty split with some who were okay with it, others who were not, so let's not always use the scapegoat of blaming Republicans for everything. It is WAY more complicated than that.


    Let's not forget that when Clinton went for DADT, he did so only as a compromise measure to win Republican support. Let's also not forget that the majority of your party's elected representatives now oppose amending DADT to allow open service by GLBT members.

    So, in honesty, C-JAZ, it's really not more complicated than that.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2010 11:38 PM GMT
    AirForceGuy75 saidWell, the interesting fact is that our military is one of the only militarizes that don't actually allow gays in openly. All of our Allies allow gays to openly serve even the Jews. The one Military if you want to call them a military that don't allow gays into their military and they aren't even our Allies is the Muslim groups in Iraq and Afghanistan that we fight on a daily bases....imagine that. People wanted to find something in common with those we call terrorists now they have it.....praise be to our government and to those we fight against......


    I really try to not be anti-american like most people are over across the pond these days, but I think everyone will agree with me here when I say that America(politically) is a joke, I remember in the 90s growing up that america seemed so tolerant and liberal in my young naive eyes,"the land of the free" it was called, the nation thats ahead of every other in every respect, what when wrong?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2010 11:51 PM GMT
    well Obama doesn't want to deal it with before the upcoming mid term elections after a disaster of a health care bill, and his party's major loss in Massachusetts.
  • AirForceGuy75

    Posts: 51

    Feb 03, 2010 2:16 AM GMT
    fizzle said
    AirForceGuy75 saidWell, the interesting fact is that our military is one of the only militarizes that don't actually allow gays in openly. All of our Allies allow gays to openly serve even the Jews.


    The military is of Israel,and not all Israelis are Jews. icon_wink.gif Semantics.
    Also, I think something important to remember here is that a lot of our allies have compulsory military service, so that's why they can't/don't discriminate like we do.


    yes you are correct on that my bad I shouldn't have said Jew but should have said Israel...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 03, 2010 2:32 AM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said
    Red_Vespa said Yeah, I suspect they're hoping the Republicans gain control of at least 1 house in Congress, after which all chance of repealing DADT will be dead, since it requires major legislative changes to US Code to accomplish.

    Not necessarily true. Let's not forget that a Democratic President put DADT in place...

    Not sure how many times I have to debunk the myth that it's all about DADT. The problem is with US law, passed by Congress and signed by the President 60 years ago. Being a homosexual in the US military is illegal, and remains illegal to this day. DADT is merely a Presidential order to the military, in his role as Commander-in-Chief.

    All DADT does is direct the military not to ask the question. Rescind DADT only, and the question gets asked again, the lawful response required being dishonorable discharge of all gay persons. The military has no say in the matter, nor the President alone; it was CONGRESS that made gays in the military illegal.

    In order for gays to serve openly in the US military, the underlying US Code must be changed, not DADT. And only Congress and the President together can do that.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 03, 2010 2:33 AM GMT
    I have no comment. Good luck!
  • CarbGoggles

    Posts: 705

    Feb 03, 2010 2:57 AM GMT
    Sillyness... Do we really need to do a study? If America was able to grow the fuck up and integrate blacks then seriously how much harder can it be to integrate gays/ lesbians. Sorry trannies, you're a different beast all together lol
  • CarbGoggles

    Posts: 705

    Feb 03, 2010 2:59 AM GMT
    We need a Flt of homos to make history kind of like the Tuskegee Airmen!
  • CarbGoggles

    Posts: 705

    Feb 03, 2010 3:03 AM GMT
    corridore said...and McCain opposes it openly.

    But Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), the ranking Republican on the panel, fired back, questioning Mullen's statement and asking that each of the chiefs' views be "on the record."

    McCain said he was "deeply disappointed" by the decision to launch the study. He called the move "clearly biased," because it presumes the law should be changed. He chastised Gates for trying to change the policy "by fiat."

    Gates later told the committee that he agreed that ultimately the policy would have to be changed by Congress. Committee Chairman Sen. Carl Levin suggested that a policy change could be accomplished as an amendment to the Defense Authorization bill.

    McCain defended the current policy, saying he was "enormously proud and thankful for every American that chooses to put on a uniform and serve."

    "Has this policy been ideal? No, it has not. But it has been effective," the Vietnam veteran and former Republican presidential nominee said. "It is well understood and predominantly supported by our fighting men and women. And it has sustained unit cohesion and unit morale, while still allowing gay and lesbian Americans to serve."

    I wish there was a McCain reality show. I'd like to know how things are between John and his wife. Didn't she lead that "NO H8" campaign?
  • BuckeyeJock13

    Posts: 44

    Feb 03, 2010 3:49 AM GMT
    I'd be interested to hear from some of the guys on here who are in the military. It's amazes me to think you can have a gay serviceman now get married in certain states and yet they have to keep that relationship a secret in the military. WTF?? I have dated a couple guys in the military and I always felt bad for the situation. We couldn't be who we wanted to be around many of his friends. Had to always come up with a story how we knew one another. There is so much concern on how this decision would impact heterosexuals in the military. Well what kind of impact is this having today on the emotional well being of those servicemen and woman who must remain closeted? Most of the American public supports letting GLBT individuals serve openly and yet this is shaping up to be one hell of a fight. If you are in the military or have been in the military I'm proud of you and thank you for your service. It's about time America did the same and let you serve without the fear you will loose your military career over your sexuality.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 03, 2010 3:50 AM GMT
    Have to be really careful with this... Everyone is in agreement that it is stupid for a man, or woman to be kicked out of the military for their sexual preference especially if they specialize in something and are willing to risk their lives to serve this country... I think a guy shouldn't have to fear about getting a letter or email or phone call from his lover, or have it listed all of his belongings if he is killed goes to his lover.. But other than that we don't really need to know his or hers sexuality.. Hell I didn't even care about other guy's girls none of that stuff was important, I just wanted to be the best at what I did.

    I can see a lot of complaints coming up because some guy was made to do another run or whatever.. him turning around saying it was done because he is gay... I really hope that doesn't start coming up because it would create a stupid mess.. Everyone gets dogged out pretty bad thats just how it is..

    They'll have to change things around, because most guys will feel a bit uncomfortable showering with another guy who he may feel is checking him out.. I remember hearing a few guys say that kind of crap... Most of the guys who do join the military especially special forces lean more to the conservative side... (there are many different types of conservatives too btw and some dont care who is gay just do your job) Then you'll have people worrying about some guys having sex and straight or gay you're not supposed to be having sex in the military...

    On the bright side even with women.. sure there is a lot of horrible words thrown around but the military is a rough place its not a politically correct environment and I don't want to see that.. Even though shit talking gets thrown around deep respect is given to the person when they prove themselves and if anyone messes with that person after that they get bitched out hard.

    Its just got to be done very carefully... We'll see.. I hope this all works out.. icon_confused.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 03, 2010 3:54 AM GMT
    CarbGoggles said
    corridore said...and McCain opposes it openly.

    But Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), the ranking Republican on the panel, fired back, questioning Mullen's statement and asking that each of the chiefs' views be "on the record."

    McCain said he was "deeply disappointed" by the decision to launch the study. He called the move "clearly biased," because it presumes the law should be changed. He chastised Gates for trying to change the policy "by fiat."

    Gates later told the committee that he agreed that ultimately the policy would have to be changed by Congress. Committee Chairman Sen. Carl Levin suggested that a policy change could be accomplished as an amendment to the Defense Authorization bill.

    McCain defended the current policy, saying he was "enormously proud and thankful for every American that chooses to put on a uniform and serve."

    "Has this policy been ideal? No, it has not. But it has been effective," the Vietnam veteran and former Republican presidential nominee said. "It is well understood and predominantly supported by our fighting men and women. And it has sustained unit cohesion and unit morale, while still allowing gay and lesbian Americans to serve."

    I wish there was a McCain reality show. I'd like to know how things are between John and his wife. Didn't she lead that "NO H8" campaign?


    That would be pretty funny lol yea she is all for the gay marriage thing a few Republicans are.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 03, 2010 4:04 AM GMT
    runnersjock saidI'd be interested to hear from some of the guys on here who are in the military. It's amazes me to think you can have a gay serviceman now get married in certain states and yet they have to keep that relationship a secret in the military. WTF?? I have dated a couple guys in the military and I always felt bad for the situation. We couldn't be who we wanted to be around many of his friends. Had to always come up with a story how we knew one another. There is so much concern on how this decision would impact heterosexuals in the military. Well what kind of impact is this having today on the emotional well being of those servicemen and woman who must remain closeted? Most of the American public supports letting GLBT individuals serve openly and yet this is shaping up to be one hell of a fight. If you are in the military or have been in the military I'm proud of you and thank you for your service. It's about time America did the same and let you serve without the fear you will loose your military career over your sexuality.



    Yea the American public (civilians) are different from people actually in the military and the military doesn't want or like civilians telling them how to run shit within that world.. There are some who don't care like I said but there are a lot who'd be kinda uncomfortable with it and its not so much of the being in the barracks and showering or offending someone's religious beliefs. Its the whole getting into a shit storm of a mess if that guy who just happens to be gay and everyone knows he's gay is made to do extra whatever which is always random.

    I started my relationship with my guy in the military and we weren't afraid of being discovered we just did our jobs and we didn't do shit because it would have been unprofessional especially since we were both in leadership positions. Had he or I been a woman it would have been the same deal.