Page 11 of 48 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 477

Thread: Officials: Half of force trained on gay ban repeal

  1. #101
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    57,325

    Re: Officials: Half of force trained on gay ban repeal

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    But I have been saying all along that our military is professional and can handle what needs to be handled. It's those damn antis who are like "OMG, those soldiers are all going to quit so they don't get gay cooties, and the ones who stay are going to be afraid to bend over, and the others are going to commit assaults on every gay they see".

    People who have been against DADT repeal have had the stupidest arguments.
    Then why the need for all the training on gays serving openly? Is it because they need more adult supervision that the Liberals want to--suddenly--admit?

  2. #102
    Liberal Fascist For Life!

    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:40 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    87,783
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Officials: Half of force trained on gay ban repeal

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Then why the need for all the training on gays serving openly? Is it because they need more adult supervision that the Liberals want to--suddenly--admit?
    This does not follow. Being able to handle it does not mean you don't need training on changes to the rules.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  3. #103
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    54,575

    Re: Officials: Half of force trained on gay ban repeal

    Quote Originally Posted by BDBoop View Post
    As are men. I had no idea how bad guys were until I spent 7-8 years working nights in an office, and hanging with the guys in the shop on breaks. Holy Hannah. We got nothin on y'all.
    nah, we're too lazy, and not nearly sneaky enough
    Worth noting, Democrats: President Trump will have a Pen and a Phone. #Precedent.

  4. #104
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    05-06-12 @ 09:12 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    9,800

    Re: Officials: Half of force trained on gay ban repeal

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    nah, we're too lazy, and not nearly sneaky enough
    Doesn't require sneaky to be a four-squared gossip.

  5. #105
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    54,575

    Re: Officials: Half of force trained on gay ban repeal

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    And I seen the opposite while I was in division with men and women, whether I was one of a few women or the only woman or women made up half the workplace, the problems did not arise from the people sleeping together nearly as much as they did from the things that I mentioned put together, especially men treating women differently because they viewed us as "the weaker sex" or, as one of my chiefs put it to me, "the guys just aren't as reliable" (which is the reason that I ended up holding 4 collateral duties, while some of the guys at my level had none).
    and again, as a woman, you have never seen anything different - you have no comparison available to you. however, when you ask other members who DO havethe ability to compare (Women in the Military):

    Quote Originally Posted by Benzin
    ...In 2007, I was in an infantry company in Iraq, living on a remote outpost (not a FOB). For the first 5 months of combat, we had no females at our outpost. I would regard the company as one of the more disciplined I've served in. After five months, we required additional support to move our troops out to missions. 3 five-ton trucks with female drivers were attached to us. Even though we afforded them their own living space (which wasnt mandatory), problems began almost immediately. All three females started to linger around the platoon bays nightly. They began relationships with NCOs, subverting the chain of command, and were engaged in sexual activity with other lower enlisted Soldiers/Airmen, as well. This caused more than one fist fight. Sex was happening in the outhouses, in the platoon bays and in the vehicles. Adultery was committed on a number of occasions. The staunch discipline we enjoyed prior to their arrival was starting to erode. My commander chose to have them sent back to their support units and "swapped" for male truck drivers. All detrimental effects reversed immediately. We found out later that one of the females became pregnant, and was sent home.

    -Later, living on another remote outpost in Iraq during 08-09, the unit i was under had a combat support company attached to it. There were about ten females in this company. We weren't there for a month and the drama began. One female became pregnant. Another committed adultery. Fights between male soldiers erupted over girlfriends. Females were hopping on convoys to other FOBs to have "conjugal visits" with their boyfriends in other units. Then another female became pregnant. Then a female NCO began a relationship with a soldier that worked for her. Eventually, there were sexual assault accusations, he said, she said. And on, and on, and on. It was a mess.

    Now this may sound like I am blaming females, I am not. I am blaming the fact that they were living with a predominantly male unit many times on FOB's. There would have been no issues if they weren't there. Of course, there are many answers to this. Some could blame male soldiers for lack of discipline. I know I do. Others would say that both males and females are to blame. Others would blame the chain of command for turning a blind eye and not wanting to do anything about the issues. But one must understand how difficult it is for a male commander to do the finger pointing...
    the results are generally the same. 19-22 year olds just aren't as disciplined, focused, or cohesive when their genitalia are involved.

    Also, if you are saying that most of the problems are coming from cliques and jealousy
    i'm not. I'm saying it comes from sexual tension. cliques, jealousy, backbiting, affairs, fraternization, all the problems that come along with it are symptoms of sexual tension between members of the unit. Unit cohesion is rapidly degraded.

    I might point out your own professed views here are not so far off from my own, where you point out the social problems (Women in the Military) that would arise from putting women in combat arms.

    how the hell do you think that will happen with only a few gay guys, even if they beat the statistics, per unit? It wouldn't be the same in numbers, since if you assume that say 3 women are assigned to a division of 100 total. So statistically, out of a hundred people, 3-5 should be gay. Lets round high and say 5, but one of them is one of the women. So now you have 4 gay men, 1 gay woman, 2 straight women, and 93 straight guys.
    mostly here I am focusing on the combat arms. they are the ones who can least afford the kinds of problems and increased strains that the repeal of DADT will put on the military. the rest of the military is already co-ed, and already has to deal with this crap. so there would be no women in this example.

    And you are telling me that the problems come from jealousy and sexual tension.
    generally, yes, that is correct.

    But the problem with this is that you must be assuming that a) those gay guys are going to look at the straight ones for companionship
    not really - but being guys they are going to look because we are more visually oriented creatures. that's what we do. and all other guys know this. ask yourself how comfortable you (or your average young lady) would feel if I were to suddenly hop in the shower with you. that reduces the level of comfort and ease that members of the unit will feel around each other, and reduces cohesion.

    The numbers do not work to be the same for the sexual tension and especially not the jealousy that you believe you are seeing in your unit with the women.
    it is certainly true that repealing DADT will be less damaging to the combat arms (at least the Grunts) than letting in women would be.

    Because the gay guys are most likely going to only be messing with the other gay guys or looking to go outside the unit altogether (which is what most people do)
    perhaps that's a navy thing - or perhaps it's ya'lls workschedule, or perhaps it's just the dynamics of being on a boat v being on a fob / camp. Of the female Marines I have observed, the only ones that do NOT screw someone in their unit fall into two groups: 1. the only lesbian in the unit 2. married and among the faithtful - there are plenty of married females who cheat just as there are plenty of male Marines who cheat (but only a small fraction of male Marines who would cheat on deployment get the chance - 100% of Females who would cheat can and do). The stresses long hours and constantly being thrown into each other are the perfect stew to stimulate and encourage the release of sexual tension - the pressures and stresses of war are particularly noted for their tendency to have this effect.
    Worth noting, Democrats: President Trump will have a Pen and a Phone. #Precedent.

  6. #106
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    54,575

    Re: Officials: Half of force trained on gay ban repeal

    Quote Originally Posted by BDBoop View Post
    Doesn't require sneaky to be a four-squared gossip.
    perhaps (I would say it does to be a good one), but generally females talk more about relational things while males talk more about functional things.
    Worth noting, Democrats: President Trump will have a Pen and a Phone. #Precedent.

  7. #107
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    05-06-12 @ 09:12 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    9,800

    Re: Officials: Half of force trained on gay ban repeal

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    perhaps (I would say it does to be a good one), but generally females talk more about relational things while males talk more about functional things.
    I must have traveled in the wrong circles. Because thanks to a couple of the guys I worked with, a marriage almost tanked. They thought it would be funny to stick a love letter, ostensibly from me, in a third guy's lunch box. He didn't see it, and brought it home. His wife found it, and flipped. Despite the fact that I had nothing to do with it, I became an outcast.

    My future husband had been his best friend since they were kids. Like first grade - kids. Once we were married, the other couple never spoke to my husband again.

    Maybe that colors my perceptions.

  8. #108
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    54,575

    Re: Officials: Half of force trained on gay ban repeal

    Quote Originally Posted by BDBoop View Post
    I must have traveled in the wrong circles. Because thanks to a couple of the guys I worked with, a marriage almost tanked. They thought it would be funny to stick a love letter, ostensibly from me, in a third guy's lunch box. He didn't see it, and brought it home. His wife found it, and flipped. Despite the fact that I had nothing to do with it, I became an outcast.
    see, that's a joke gone wrong. they're not wrong (as I would understand that situation occuring in the guys i've known) for slipping in the note to be funny - they are wrong for not having the testicular fortitude to come forward and admit it when the thing went south.

    My future husband had been his best friend since they were kids. Like first grade - kids. Once we were married, the other couple never spoke to my husband again.

    Maybe that colors my perceptions.
    do you think the guy in question wanted to lose his best friend - or do you think that the jealousy/insecurity factor of his wife pushed him in that direction?
    Worth noting, Democrats: President Trump will have a Pen and a Phone. #Precedent.

  9. #109
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    05-06-12 @ 09:12 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    9,800

    Re: Officials: Half of force trained on gay ban repeal

    They did admit it. She didn't care. And yeah, it was "if you ever speak to her again" *she wasn't exactly mentally healthy* ... so J let it go. Maybe they've been reunited since I'm out of the picture. I would hope so.

  10. #110
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    05-06-12 @ 09:12 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    9,800

    Re: Officials: Half of force trained on gay ban repeal

    And what really gets me? J is one of the good guys. He would NEVER stray. We flirted, but the kind of flirt that happens in front of god and country, and everybody knows there's nothing going on there. He was one step down from other J, who flirted like a madman, but if you looked like you believed him, he'd invoke his wife's name like the mere mention could prevent evil from befalling him. Simply adorable.

Page 11 of 48 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •