So now we all know where you are coming from..... but perhaps you missed the news today. Colin Powell is now in favor of lifting the ban, I think he has some combat experience.

Any answer about the harassment of women yet?

What is that supposed to mean?
Does anybody really take Powell seriously anymore?:sigh:

So let me get this "straight" Adm McMullen can't comment because he has no combat experience and Colin Powell no longer agrees with you so therefore no one can take him seriously.

You seem to shape things to fit the outcome you want to see.


Any answer yet on how to resolve the harassment of women by the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy?

You may not want to hear this but my sources say that women in the service "get over" with things that the men can't. Seems they use their feminine ways to get what or what not, they want. As a women, I think I understand. For every ying, there is a yang.

Donna, that's an insult to every servicewoman who ever had to deal with "Tailhook".

Tell me how a reunion 20 years ago at the Las Vegas Hilton where officers were drinking and partying has to do with ordinary enlisted people doing their everyday duties for their country?

:agree::agree: I can't believe she said that. Not worth my time.

You are joking...you have to joking. Tailhook a reunion...did you not hear about the gauntlet? One of the worse examples of sexual harassment of women in the military and you call it drinking and partying?

You must be from another planet.

Have you ever served in the military?

Most men in my family have served. 35th Annual Tailhook Association Symposium is just that. Look it up.

Newly sworn in Massachusetts Senator, Scott Brown, was asked today about the military's policy of "Don't ask, don't tell" He said he would have to talk with ground combat commanders about their opinion on the matter before making a judgment. They are the ones that will have to deal with it. (last sentence, my words)

Since the original thread is completely hijacked, I guess I have to jump in:
 

What is the thought over the years as to why the military did not, does not mix men and women in the same barracks?

Let's assume for a minute a reason could be to avoid sexual (guy and gal) encounters....good....bad....consensual....other.

Since it will be openly OK for same sex opportunities to occur in the military....should they not also allow men and women in the same barracks.

I sorta think when these "restrictions" were put in place it was to eliminate sexual encounters.......

so now what?

btk

Excellent response. It seems that Obama is just taking up the causes that were the Clinton's 15 years ago. (Healthcare, homosexuals in service etc.)
I understand that this is a subject that many people do not want to discuss. Many fear that they will be labeled anti-homosexual if they voice their concerns for the military.

I just want to say that I have nothing personal against homosexuals. My family has dealt with that issue over 10 years ago when my married nephew came "out of the closet." Needless to say it was a shock for everyone, including his wife. But he and his long time partner are part of the family now. All of the issues have been resolved and everybody feels comfortable with the situation.
As a person who supports the military and is proud of my family's contributions through the generations, my only concern is the soldier who put his or her's life on the line every day.
I just wanted to put that out there.

Well, if you beleive that our service men and women are nothing more than animals who can't take "NO" for an answer and will rape everyone in sight, I suppose there's not a lot that can be said to change one's mind.

See - the thing is, I know a lot of gays, lesbians and bisexuals (actually it's more accurate to say I *have* known more as many that I've known have moved/drifted away as decades have passed). Over the years I got to know more about those in my family, those I worked with and those I was friends with. The misconceptions and pre-conceived notions are sometimes shocking, sometimes downright criminal.

Women in the military, mixed-race units - they were both called "social experiments" by detractors in their day. The military had a policy of believing that blacks were inferior and incapable of flying airplanes until the "experiment" of the Tuskegee Airmen.

Now the Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs says it's time for the policy to go - as soon as they can work out issues concerning base housing, benefits, etc - and now John McCain, who said in 2006 that he would support repealing "Don't Ask Don't Tell" when the military brass said it was time, has now flip-flopped 100% and says it's not the time.

Can you honestly say that it's "correct" to discharge someone just because of who they are attracted to? Especially in the cases a few years ago where Arab translators were in such high demand and low supply in Iraq, yet kicked out because they were accused of being gay!

There it is again, twisting the subject to include race. Seems every time a liberal gets stuck in neutral, the race card comes up. We are talking about homosexuals in the service?
Again, I personally do not care what McCain thinks about this issue. He was a pilot whose peers were the elite in the service. Again, the only opinions that hold water are the commanders whose troops are actually engaged in the support and fighting for our country.
Off topic: One of my brother's best friends was a Vietnam POW and I can tell you for fact that there is a huge circle of Ex POW's that do not hold McCain in high esteem. They have a code and don't like to talk about it. But it is real.

Donna, you misspelled "libertarian" as "liberal".

My father was career Navy. My brother was Navy. My mom was a Marine. My uncle was in the Air Force and my grandfather was Army. My fiancee has two sons, one who just got out of the Navy and another who is about to get out of the Army now that his Iraq tour is up. Heck, I work supporting an Air Force contract.

You said I brought "the race card" up - you forgot I also "brought" the "sex card" up. Why? Because you might not realize just how similar the situations are. People being denied permission to serve their country because of something that has NOTHING to do with their ability to serve their country.

Also, if you don't like what McCain thinks, apparently you can wait a little while, like the weather in New England, it'll change (and I find that highly disappointing).

So far, the only "put the brakes on a bit" thing I've heard that, to me, makes sense is that the military should be given some reasonable amount of time to work out what it (openly allowing gays) will mean for things like base housing, benefits, etc. Time to develop policies, in other words - and that certainly sounds reasonable to me.