Military chiefs urge against ending gay ban

[KYTOP]

Well today the head of the Marines, Army, and Air Force all speak against ending DADT:

Military chiefs urge against ending gay ban

Dec 3, 01:13 PM EST

By Phil Stewart

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Military chiefs told the Senate on Friday they opposed ending the armed forces' ban on gays anytime soon, urging caution over President Barack Obama's effort to repeal the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy.

"This is a bad time, senator," Marine Corps Commandant James Amos told a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

"Based on what I know about the tough fight on the ground in Afghanistan ... my recommendation is that we should not implement repeal at this time."

The dissent, most strongly articulated by the Marines and to lesser degrees the Army and Air Force, was widely expected and echoed past warnings about adding strain on a force already stretched by wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The dim view was not shared by all top U.S. officials testifying. The chiefs of the Navy, Coast Guard and the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff backed repeal.

Admiral Mike Mullen, who is the top U.S. military officer as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, on Thursday voiced his strong support for repeal, as did U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

But the latest dissent could bolster Republican efforts to block Senate action on ending the 17-year-old policy, which allows gays and lesbians to serve as long as their sexual orientation is not revealed.

Senator John McCain, a top Republican and decorated veteran of the Vietnam War who lost to Obama in the 2008 presidential election, said he opposed any vote on repeal this year.

"It's very obvious to me that there is a lot more scrutiny and work to be involved before passing this legislation," he said. "That's why we see such a diversity of views here among the service chiefs."

Obama campaigned for the presidency in 2008 on a pledge to fully repeal the law barring gays and lesbians from serving openly in the military.

The effort, however, faces a promised Republican procedural roadblock in the 100-member Senate. It is unclear if Democrats can muster the needed 60 votes to pass it.

A Pentagon study released on Tuesday predicted little impact if the ban were repealed but acknowledged a "significant minority" of about 30 percent overall expressed negative views or concerns about repeal. That figure was higher in the Marine Corps and generally rose among combat units.

Gates and Mullen said training could mitigate risks from repeal. They said the measure before the Senate would not allow the repeal to be implemented until Obama, Gates and Mullen certify the military is ready.

They also rejected arguments that the military was too strained by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to integrate openly serving homosexuals.

"War does not stifle change. It demands it," Mullen told the same committee on Thursday.

But Army Chief of Staff General George Casey disagreed on Friday, saying: "The fact that we're at war complicates repeal."

Asked about Mullen's comments, Casey acknowledged that in some cases the close bonds formed among troops at war could "facilitate" integration of openly gay and lesbian troops.

"But frankly, I think that's a bit of a stretch," he said.

[JKane]

It's a little amusing how it breaks down among the branches...

Now I've got In the Navy stuck in my head.

I'm entirely for repeal but am often amused when a stereotype coincides with reality.

[OneFinger]

I served in the Navy and had 2 lovers (one in San Diego and the other in Connecticut). Many crew members knew I was gay and socialized with my lovers and myself. In fact, one of the crew members set me up on a date with guy who became my lover in Connecticut.

I held a top secret security clearance and was even decorated by the Secretary of the Navy. The same was true for one of the other gays on my ship. It was my observation that the gays always received the highest performance reviews and were typically assigned to some of the more critical positions.

Since leaving the military I worked in the defense industry. Again, I was granted a security clearance for my position in a nuclear-related field.

While I've never advertised my sexual orientation, I've also never tried to hide it.

I see absolutely no reason why gays shouldn't be allowed to serve unrestricted in the military. And, with an all volunteer military, the gays that are serving are there because they WANT to be - not because they were drafted or forced to serve.

Conditions when I was on active duty were much different than today. IMHO, the young guys today are much more accepting of alternate lifestyles. So, if my gayness to my shipmates was no big deal almost 30 years ago, why is everyone getting their shorts in a bunch about it today??

[TotallyOz]

What is the real likelihood that this will pass before the new Congress takes effect? Once that happens, does it really have any chance in hell? See what McCain is now spewing. The Republicans are good at one thing and that is finding a subject that they want and the entire party sticking to it.

I hate politicians and the Democrats are stupid as well. I would love to see an entire coup of the American political system. Hell, I'd even agree to let Donald Trump be Emperor just to see how he does. He can't do any worst than the idiots we have in charge now.

Yes, I am a die hard Democrat and I was supportive of Obama until he sat on his ass and didn't accomplish the things he could have. He did a lot. I'll give him that. But, he let others control the agenda and IMHO is a pussy!

[TampaYankee]

What is the real likelihood that this will pass before the new Congress takes effect? Once that happens, does it really have any chance in hell? See what McCain is now spewing. The Republicans are good at one thing and that is finding a subject that they want and the entire party sticking to it.

I believe that if this doesn't pass the Senate now then it will be on the Democrats, not the Republicans. I suspect that 2-4 GOPers will vote for cloture, the way it looks now. What is less sure to me is what action Nelson, NE, Prior and Lincoln, AR and Webb/VA will do. There comes a time when the Dems need to impose party discipline just as the Republicans do every week on votes. I wouldn't demand they vote one way on the bill but clouture is a different issue altogher. If the Party's own members cannot support the Party to exercise its duly elected majority power then why accept them as members. They really are not members of the Party but independent actors using the good graces of the party only for their own parochial purposes.

[BigK]

I served in the Navy and had 2 lovers (one in San Diego and the other in Connecticut). Many crew members knew I was gay and socialized with my lovers and myself. In fact, one of the crew members set me up on a date with guy who became my lover in Connecticut.

I held a top secret security clearance and was even decorated by the Secretary of the Navy. The same was true for one of the other gays on my ship. It was my observation that the gays always received the highest performance reviews and were typically assigned to some of the more critical positions.

Since leaving the military I worked in the defense industry. Again, I was granted a security clearance for my position in a nuclear-related field.

While I've never advertised my sexual orientation, I've also never tried to hide it.

I see absolutely no reason why gays shouldn't be allowed to serve unrestricted in the military. And, with an all volunteer military, the gays that are serving are there because they WANT to be - not because they were drafted or forced to serve.

Conditions when I was on active duty were much different than today. IMHO, the young guys today are much more accepting of alternate lifestyles. So, if my gayness to my shipmates was no big deal almost 30 years ago, why is everyone getting their shorts in a bunch about it today??

Thanks Onefinger for your observations. I've never been in the military, but when this subject comes up I've always had a gut feeling the rank and file probably could care less about another serviceman's sexual preference.

[Guest zipperzone]

Thanks Onefinger for your observations. I've never been in the military, but when this subject comes up I've always had a gut feeling the rank and file probably could care less about another serviceman's sexual preference.

You're quite right. Lots of them would look forward to the blow-jobs they might receive if the penalty for discovery was not expulsion.

[BiBottomBoy]

Hmmm a bunch of young in shape men who want to be part of an organization where they work out and get all sweaty together yet are afraid of gay men.

Hmmmm....

Here's how I think it breaks down:

Army: Lots of gay sex with lube.

Marines Lots of gay sex, with spit as lube.

Special Forces Lots of gay sex, no lube and take it like a man!

[OneFinger]

You're quite right. Lots of them would look forward to the blow-jobs they might receive if the penalty for discovery was not expulsion.

While it's been several years since I was on active duty, there was a unwritten code of ethics among the military gays that I knew. I served aboard a submarine where there are very close quarters and limited privacy. Not once did any sexual activity go on between crew members while aboard the ship.

Now, when we were in port and off the ship, that's a different story.

I can't imagine blow jobs going on inside the tent cities of Afghanistan or while flying an F-16. I serious doubt there would be fucking in the foxholes or bunkers while at war.

There's a time and place for sex. And, in my observations, most military gays are well aware of socially-accepted boundaries. I mean, when was the last time you had sex at work??

[BiBottomBoy]

"I mean, when was the last time you had sex at work??"

Well, I'm guessing the escorts who read this forum might have an interesting response to that question.

[OneFinger]

"I mean, when was the last time you had sex at work??"

Well, I'm guessing the escorts who read this forum might have an interesting response to that question.

LOL, very valid point for that line of work.

[BiBottomBoy]

Well given that this is an escort site, it was sorta top of mind for this bottom.