Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Matter

[Indy317]

+1,000,000 It never ceases to amaze me how many people actually think the 1A applies to private property such as internet forums.

If a person's 2A rights apply on private property (take your guns to work), why not 1A rights? How is that any different?

 

[rmabrey]

If a person's 2A rights apply on private property (take your guns to work), why not 1A rights? How is that any different?

You mean besides the fact that the parking lot bill violates the rights of the property owner and never should have been passed in the first place

 

[rjstew317]

but were talking about the government,,,the government dont get to enact rules based on unscientific ideas...

not quite, your comparing the concept of government as it applies the private citizens, and that doesn't work in this case. once you sign the contract you are no longer a private citizen for the time frame listed in your contract. you are now subject to a different set of rules.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

This 1000 times over. The most respected leaders I had were the ones who gave out the most respect. When they said jump, we said how high. I worked in an S3 shop for a year around lt.'s, cptn's, majors, and lt col. We conversed every day in normal conversation and there was zero ambiguity as to who was in charge. We followed orders out of respect, not because we were forced to stand at attention or parade rest when conversing or that they held ucmj manuals over our heads.

Leaders build esprit de corps by sweating, bleeding and suffering together, not by acting as slave drivers making soldiers do stupid human tricks to stroke their own egos. The captain from Restrepo was a good leader. It looked like his soldiers would crawl trough hell for him because they knew he'd be right next to them.

We often talk a out our soldiers deserve respect. Why don't we start by treating them like citizens instead of slaves?

Because you can't tell a citizen to take a building or charge a hill knowing that they know they are going to die. Citizens tell you to go to hell. Or freeze. Like it or not the military is a different animal.

You mean besides the fact that the parking lot bill violates the rights of the property owner and never should have been passed in the first place

+1000000

I'm shocked by the number of people that are willing to throw someone else's property rights under the bus for their own perceived yet incorrect rights.

 

[Wild Deuce]

For those of us that opposed repeal of DADT or are generally opposed to homosexuality ...

Once we have expressed our opinion here and made a few follow-up remarks, I suggest that we disengage from further discussion here. This is a topic that will absolutely not be resolved on this forum, nor should it be. The subject matter is much deeper than a simple discussion of rights or equality. As already mentioned, the forum rules (rules, btw, that I fully support in regards to property rights) prevent full discussion of the underlying issues. Further discussion on our part will only allow those that disagree with us to paint us with a broad brush that calls to mind some of the worst our society has to offer.

Until we learn to intelligently present what we stand for and support instead of what we oppose all the time, no one will take us seriously and we will continue to be marginalized. We can do none of that unless we know and understand what it is we are talking about. For too long, it is "the other side" that has not only defined the terms but even defines us ... often incorrectly and unfairly .... and sometimes, correctly (to our shame).

The first step though ... make sure we practice what we preach ... then educate oursleves! After that, engage those around you (skip the forums).

 

[SnoopLoggyDog]

Got to work this morning and this was posted in my Gov email box. From the Chief of Staff of the USAF. Should shed some light on the current situation.

From: CSAF
Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2010 11:02 PM
Subject: Repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"
Fellow Airmen,

Yesterday, the Senate passed HR 2965, a bill designed to repeal Section 654 of Title 10 of the United States Code, known as the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law. Once the President signs the bill into law, the Department of Defense will proceed to implement the change in a responsible, deliberate, and careful manner.

It is important to understand that the President's signing of the new bill into law does not mean the Don't Ask Don't Tell law will be repealed immediately. Instead, the Congressional language stipulates that repeal occurs 60 days after certification by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Secretary of Defense, and the President that the necessary policies and regulations have been prepared to implement repeal and that repeal is consistent with standards of military readiness, effectiveness, unit cohesion, recruiting and retention of the Armed Forces. To repeat, the implementation and certification process will not happen immediately; it will take time. Meanwhile, the current law remains in effect. All Air Force members should conduct themselves accordingly.

In the coming days and weeks as we prepare for the repeal, we will provide education and training material to help all Airmen understand what is expected in a post-repeal environment.

Effective leadership, however, is key to implementing this change and success will rest on the shoulders of senior leaders like me, commanders, chiefs, first sergeants, and supervisors. The standards of conduct we expect of all Airmen will not change. Moreover, we will continue to treat each other, as members of the Air Force family, with dignity and respect.

I know each of you will approach this issue professionally and that you will continue to adhere faithfully to our core values of Integrity, Service before Self, and Excellence in all we do. By following our core values, we will successfully implement this change with the same unparalleled professionalism we have demonstrated with every transformation we have undertaken in peace and war.
NORTON A SCHWARTZ
Chief of Staff

 

[dross]

Because you can't tell a citizen to take a building or charge a hill knowing that they know they are going to die. Citizens tell you to go to hell. Or freeze. Like it or not the military is a different animal.
.

I'm starting to catch on to you. You phrase a good portion of your positions stronger than you mean them in order to make broader points and to tweak those positions you consider silly or too extreme.

I don't believe you think soldiers or marines must be treated as slaves in order to comply.

I was known as a tough NCO. I have the distinguished honor of drawing the most expensive prices when soldiers sold their guard duty on the nights I was designated Sergeant of the Guard, as well as certain other dubious honors. Not ever because I screwed with guys and played games with them that illustrated my power over them. Just because in those days I had a higher dedication to perfectionism that my years have now mellowed. No one ever accused me of being too soft on my guys, but at the same time, I never yelled, I never threatened, and they could call me by my first name after work over a beer.

Oh, and if I had had a gay soldier under my authority, I guarantee that if he pulled his weight and could soldier, he'd have been accepted by the team, first and foremost because I would have accepted him, and not far behind, because the guys I knew cared more about the mission than anything else, and competence and performance were valued above all.

I never had a gay soldier who worked directly for me, but I observed some good ones whose sexuality was an open secret and who thrived and excelled.

 

[mrjarrell]

Got to work this morning and this was posted in my Gov email box. From the Chief of Staff of the USAF. Should shed some light on the current situation.

From: CSAF
Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2010 11:02 PM
Subject: Repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"
Fellow Airmen,

Yesterday, the Senate passed HR 2965, a bill designed to repeal Section 654 of Title 10 of the United States Code, known as the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law. Once the President signs the bill into law, the Department of Defense will proceed to implement the change in a responsible, deliberate, and careful manner.

It is important to understand that the President's signing of the new bill into law does not mean the Don't Ask Don't Tell law will be repealed immediately. Instead, the Congressional language stipulates that repeal occurs 60 days after certification by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Secretary of Defense, and the President that the necessary policies and regulations have been prepared to implement repeal and that repeal is consistent with standards of military readiness, effectiveness, unit cohesion, recruiting and retention of the Armed Forces. To repeat, the implementation and certification process will not happen immediately; it will take time. Meanwhile, the current law remains in effect. All Air Force members should conduct themselves accordingly.

In the coming days and weeks as we prepare for the repeal, we will provide education and training material to help all Airmen understand what is expected in a post-repeal environment.

Effective leadership, however, is key to implementing this change and success will rest on the shoulders of senior leaders like me, commanders, chiefs, first sergeants, and supervisors. The standards of conduct we expect of all Airmen will not change. Moreover, we will continue to treat each other, as members of the Air Force family, with dignity and respect.

I know each of you will approach this issue professionally and that you will continue to adhere faithfully to our core values of Integrity, Service before Self, and Excellence in all we do. By following our core values, we will successfully implement this change with the same unparalleled professionalism we have demonstrated with every transformation we have undertaken in peace and war.
NORTON A SCHWARTZ
Chief of Staff

So, despite what some people have said there will not be a return to pre-DADT no gays. There will be a phased in integration and the very spirit of the repeal is what will be implemented, not what some people wish. As usual, it looks like the AF is exemplifying professionalism. Kudos to them!

 

[ghostinthewood]

For those of us that opposed repeal of DADT or are generally opposed to homosexuality ...

Once we have expressed our opinion here and made a few follow-up remarks, I suggest that we disengage from further discussion here. This is a topic that will absolutely not be resolved on this forum, nor should it be. The subject matter is much deeper than a simple discussion of rights or equality. As already mentioned, the forum rules (rules, btw, that I fully support in regards to property rights) prevent full discussion of the underlying issues. Further discussion on our part will only allow those that disagree with us to paint us with a broad brush that calls to mind some of the worst our society has to offer.

Until we learn to intelligently present what we stand for and support instead of what we oppose all the time, no one will take us seriously and we will continue to be marginalized. We can do none of that unless we know and understand what it is we are talking about. For too long, it is "the other side" that has not only defined the terms but even defines us ... often incorrectly and unfairly .... and sometimes, correctly (to our shame).

The first step though ... make sure we practice what we preach ... then educate oursleves! After that, engage those around you (skip the forums).

I disagree with you with every bone in my body, but if I were in your situation that seems reasonable.

 

[dan lenson]

Let those affected decide what they want and move on.

There it is. Defer to the call of those who are gonna hafta live with it & fight beside it.

You're onto somethin', Bumi.

 

[hornadylnl]

Because you can't tell a citizen to take a building or charge a hill knowing that they know they are going to die. Citizens tell you to go to hell. Or freeze. Like it or not the military is a different animal.



+1000000

I'm shocked by the number of people that are willing to throw someone else's property rights under the bus for their own perceived yet incorrect rights.

A soldier will follow a good leader, especially for a cause he believes in, not just because you hold the ucmj over his head.

We need more Major Winters and less Captain Sobels. Discipline doesn't make up for poor leadership.

The fact that a soldier voluntarily enlists shows they have a willingness to fight for our country. Aemre there a few who are clueless as to what they're volunteering for? Yes, there are a few. Now do your job as a leader and chapter them out of the military.

Are our soldiers men and women or are they children and their leaders need to play their mommies? Billy, clean your room. Billy, time to get up for work.

 

[dan lenson]

... and they could call me by my first name after work over a beer.

You and I don't handle business alike, broheem.

Just my dolla-fiddy.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

I'm starting to catch on to you. You phrase a good portion of your positions stronger than you mean them in order to make broader points and to tweak those positions you consider silly or too extreme.

I don't believe you think soldiers or marines must be treated as slaves in order to comply.

I was known as a tough NCO. I have the distinguished honor of drawing the most expensive prices when soldiers sold their guard duty on the nights I was designated Sergeant of the Guard, as well as certain other dubious honors. Not ever because I screwed with guys and played games with them that illustrated my power over them. Just because in those days I had a higher dedication to perfectionism that my years have now mellowed. No one ever accused me of being too soft on my guys, but at the same time, I never yelled, I never threatened, and they could call me by my first name after work over a beer.

Oh, and if I had had a gay soldier under my authority, I guarantee that if he pulled his weight and could soldier, he'd have been accepted by the team, first and foremost because I would have accepted him, and not far behind, because the guys I knew cared more about the mission than anything else, and competence and performance were valued above all.

I never had a gay soldier who worked directly for me, but I observed some good ones whose sexuality was an open secret and who thrived and excelled.

No, but these were the only options offered. I've learned that with a certain cohort moderating a position or offering a different solution still makes you a statist or some idiotic thing like that. So I thought I'd accept the premise the two extremes given were the only ones available.

The real answer was non of the above. Warriors are that - warriors. They had the rights the Marine Corps issued them, and the responsibility they earned and maintained every day. I fired non-hacker ****bird Marines that showed no ability to get the job done. Not without first trying to meld them into what they needed to be. I was a platoon sargeant, platoon leader, and company commander. We did the typical smokin and jokin, but when it came time to execute the mission everyone knew if it came to it they would be thrown to the wolves. They also knew I would be standing between them and those wolves. We had our own justice system. I guarantee some of my Marines wished they had gone to office hours or court martial. We were a family. We still are a family. I could call any of my guys and they'd be here in a minute. And they know the same about me.

Luckily I was in a unit where there weren't a whole lot of birds. They'd get sent back to the grunts most ricky tick if they were any trouble, didn't meld with the team, or caused any problems. Hell we couldn't even get into a good bar fight without facing a figurative firing squad.

The notion that warriors have rights is silly and foreign to me. It ranks right up there with timeout cards in recruit training. I faced live fire in training. I've had many of the techniques libtards call torture performed to me. You know what? I don't think I ever heard anyone use the word "rights" my entire military career. Except when I was read my rights after breaking a Staff Sargeant's jaw who took me to the woodshed when I was a foolish young Lance Corporal.

In my time you had the right to do as told where told when told how told and if you executed flawlessly you might get home to old Mary Jane Rotten Crotch before Jody moved in. I guess we are supposed to have a kinder and gentler military now. Honestly I'm glad I'm not part of it.

 

[jeremy]

So, despite what some people have said there will not be a return to pre-DADT no gays. There will be a phased in integration and the very spirit of the repeal is what will be implemented, not what some people wish. As usual, it looks like the AF is exemplifying professionalism. Kudos to them!

Do not mistake what I have said in this thread as wishing for a return to the Pre-DADT days. It is just the opposite. I have seen the Military scramble to be PC and it hurts the Troops when we are caught in the middle of some Politicians petty little games to gain their re-election. I have more fear of the same Politicians that are saying they will come up with this great plan to phase integrate just going ehhh, I got my votes. Leaving the Services to figure out the Goat Rope.

As I stated earlier why not just Modify Art 125 which is the catch all that was/is/may be used to punish those that are deemed by the commands to be worthy of punishment?!

 

[ghostinthewood]

No, but these were the only options offered. I've learned that with a certain cohort moderating a position or offering a different solution still makes you a statist or some idiotic thing like that. So I thought I'd accept the premise the two extremes given were the only ones available.

The real answer was non of the above. Warriors are that - warriors. They had the rights the Marine Corps issued them, and the responsibility they earned and maintained every day. I fired non-hacker ****bird Marines that showed no ability to get the job done. Not without first trying to meld them into what they needed to be. I was a platoon sargeant, platoon leader, and company commander. We did the typical smokin and jokin, but when it came time to execute the mission everyone knew if it came to it they would be thrown to the wolves. They also knew I would be standing between them and those wolves. We had our own justice system. I guarantee some of my Marines wished they had gone to office hours or court martial. We were a family. We still are a family. I could call any of my guys and they'd be here in a minute. And they know the same about me.

Luckily I was in a unit where there weren't a whole lot of birds. They'd get sent back to the grunts most ricky tick if they were any trouble, didn't meld with the team, or caused any problems. Hell we couldn't even get into a good bar fight without facing a figurative firing squad.

The notion that warriors have rights is silly and foreign to me. It ranks right up there with timeout cards in recruit training. I faced live fire in training. I've had many of the techniques libtards call torture performed to me. You know what? I don't think I ever heard anyone use the word "rights" my entire military career. Except when I was read my rights after breaking a Staff Sargeant's jaw who took me to the woodshed when I was a foolish young Lance Corporal.

In my time you had the right to do as told where told when told how told and if you executed flawlessly you might get home to old Mary Jane Rotten Crotch before Jody moved in. I guess we are supposed to have a kinder and gentler military now. Honestly I'm glad I'm not part of it.

Warrior | Define Warrior at Dictionary.com

Nothing about sexual preference. Hmm..

 

[stormryder]

Personally I couldn't care less about my fellow soldiers preference.
As long as he/she does not flaunt it for all to see and does their duty, I rather not know.
I just rather not have that information.

However, I will go on record and say I view Homosexuality with the deepest of contempt, and would like to see it eradicated.

 

[Compatriot G]

No, but these were the only options offered. I've learned that with a certain cohort moderating a position or offering a different solution still makes you a statist or some idiotic thing like that. So I thought I'd accept the premise the two extremes given were the only ones available.

The real answer was non of the above. Warriors are that - warriors. They had the rights the Marine Corps issued them, and the responsibility they earned and maintained every day. I fired non-hacker ****bird Marines that showed no ability to get the job done. Not without first trying to meld them into what they needed to be. I was a platoon sargeant, platoon leader, and company commander. We did the typical smokin and jokin, but when it came time to execute the mission everyone knew if it came to it they would be thrown to the wolves. They also knew I would be standing between them and those wolves. We had our own justice system. I guarantee some of my Marines wished they had gone to office hours or court martial. We were a family. We still are a family. I could call any of my guys and they'd be here in a minute. And they know the same about me.

Luckily I was in a unit where there weren't a whole lot of birds. They'd get sent back to the grunts most ricky tick if they were any trouble, didn't meld with the team, or caused any problems. Hell we couldn't even get into a good bar fight without facing a figurative firing squad.

The notion that warriors have rights is silly and foreign to me. It ranks right up there with timeout cards in recruit training. I faced live fire in training. I've had many of the techniques libtards call torture performed to me. You know what? I don't think I ever heard anyone use the word "rights" my entire military career. Except when I was read my rights after breaking a Staff Sargeant's jaw who took me to the woodshed when I was a foolish young Lance Corporal.

In my time you had the right to do as told where told when told how told and if you executed flawlessly you might get home to old Mary Jane Rotten Crotch before Jody moved in. I guess we are supposed to have a kinder and gentler military now. Honestly I'm glad I'm not part of it.

SEMPER FI!!!!

 

[hornadylnl]

Except when I was read my rights after breaking a Staff Sargeant's jaw who took me to the woodshed when I was a foolish young Lance Corporal.

.

So did he do the cowards thing and lock you up at attention before he tried to beat on you? I'm sure he pulled rank afterwards.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

So did he do the cowards thing and lock you up at attention before he tried to beat on you? I'm sure he pulled rank afterwards.

Yep he charged me with assault. Charges were dropped. Sargeant Major threatened to kill me if I ever laid my hands on one of his staff NCOs again. I didn't. The Staff Sargeant was sent to supply or admin or somewhere. I was meritoriously promoted a month later.

 

[hornadylnl]

Yep he charged me with assault. Charges were dropped. Sargeant Major threatened to kill me if I ever laid my hands on one of his staff NCOs again. I didn't. The Staff Sargeant was sent to supply or admin or somewhere. I was meritoriously promoted a month later.

Yep, that's great leadership. Cowardly lock a guy up at attention and commence to beating on them. Then charge them with assault if they retalliate. Most nco's I served under pissed and moaned all day long because they can no longer do that. Are nco's leaders or babysitters? I'll say it again. Discipline does not make up for poor leadership.