IN the early 1960's we had several gays at our Base in England. This was before DADT and every other kind of lie that a politician can tell to commanders. The First Sergeant and the Orderly Room Clerk did the room assignments and generally could get a match of compatable roomies. Of course, we could not point blank ask back then either. The Commander inspected the barracks whenever. One Officer was caught with an enlisted man in a compromising DADT position. By by birdies (this Officer was the Base Dentist - old enought to be dead by now - or over 100) overnight. One enlisted in the barracks (the barracks room walls were about 1 foot shy of the ceiling for ventelation) was caught standing on the footlocker with his drunk roomie naked on the top bunk and of course didn't know what was going on. By by birdies for both of them - sodomy for one and drunk and disorderly for the other - no holes barred. Both wound up with bad conduct or worse discharges. The Commander dealt with it. No Politicians no questions. No rebuttals.
This is a fairly straight way that Commanders have the authority to COMMAND their Unit.
Politicians are known to loose wars (Vietnam). Why not keep DADT and leave the commander to hell alone and let him run his unit the way he sees fit. WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT.
I was a First Sergant in line for CSM in the US ARMY when they came out with DADT. I was not happy about it at all. I felt these people should never be in the military. I am glad that I am retired, I know I could not be in with this current social experiment.
I was in during Vietnam and the Cold War, late '60s to early '70s and most of the ones I encountered, the Marines got to before the officers could summarily discharge them; those that survived that encounter were summarily discharged as was the policy still at that time. I could be wrong, but I honestly don't think Marines have changed all that much. As a nurse, I saw them "after" the Marines had explained why their behaviors were unacceptable in the barracks. I also had to deal with the WM who hit on the young wife of one of my corpsmen who was working as a civilian aide in the hospital, They come in both "flavors" and neither one seems able or willing to keep their proclivities to themselves while on active duty. Either way, unwilling or unable, it's highly disruptive and simply doesn't belong in a military outfit. If homosexuals want to serve the nation, they need to find a different, less disruptive venue for doing so. NO ONE ever once considered quartering straight men and women together, let alone having them share showers, for that same obvious reason; and these dolts making this decision apparently aren't bright enough to GET that it's EXACTLY the SAME thing!
I believe that all of us who served knew of one or more queers. No one made a big deal over it unless a situation developed. Then the troops generally handled it in their own manner. The folks just went off into the sunset with no fanfare on their discharges. (Generally a BCD or some such).
Now because of this fatal disease of political correctness infects the gutless syncopantic senior officers (who wouldn't be senior officers otherwise) the normal troops have to put up with these perverted freaks.
It is just a matter of time before one of these disgusting people gets the crap beat out of him (or her) by one or more of those sick of serving with them.
Unfortunately the Constitution requires that appointed bureaucrat hacks issue orders to the professional soldiers . The founding fathers, after getting rid of the British Army, were not about to let an American Military run the country. Because of this our Military efforts have been hamstrung and hampered in every war or action ever fought.
Replies
IN the early 1960's we had several gays at our Base in England. This was before DADT and every other kind of lie that a politician can tell to commanders. The First Sergeant and the Orderly Room Clerk did the room assignments and generally could get a match of compatable roomies. Of course, we could not point blank ask back then either. The Commander inspected the barracks whenever. One Officer was caught with an enlisted man in a compromising DADT position. By by birdies (this Officer was the Base Dentist - old enought to be dead by now - or over 100) overnight. One enlisted in the barracks (the barracks room walls were about 1 foot shy of the ceiling for ventelation) was caught standing on the footlocker with his drunk roomie naked on the top bunk and of course didn't know what was going on. By by birdies for both of them - sodomy for one and drunk and disorderly for the other - no holes barred. Both wound up with bad conduct or worse discharges. The Commander dealt with it. No Politicians no questions. No rebuttals.
This is a fairly straight way that Commanders have the authority to COMMAND their Unit.
Politicians are known to loose wars (Vietnam). Why not keep DADT and leave the commander to hell alone and let him run his unit the way he sees fit. WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT.
I was a First Sergant in line for CSM in the US ARMY when they came out with DADT. I was not happy about it at all. I felt these people should never be in the military. I am glad that I am retired, I know I could not be in with this current social experiment.
I believe that all of us who served knew of one or more queers. No one made a big deal over it unless a situation developed. Then the troops generally handled it in their own manner. The folks just went off into the sunset with no fanfare on their discharges. (Generally a BCD or some such).
Now because of this fatal disease of political correctness infects the gutless syncopantic senior officers (who wouldn't be senior officers otherwise) the normal troops have to put up with these perverted freaks.
It is just a matter of time before one of these disgusting people gets the crap beat out of him (or her) by one or more of those sick of serving with them.
Unfortunately the Constitution requires that appointed bureaucrat hacks issue orders to the professional soldiers . The founding fathers, after getting rid of the British Army, were not about to let an American Military run the country. Because of this our Military efforts have been hamstrung and hampered in every war or action ever fought.
This is Obama's way of transforming America...