• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

DADT cloture passes

GPS_Flex said:
Nice. Thanks for the reply.
So of those, who allows discrimination lawsuits to be brought against the military?
Click to expand...

Wait. Do we allow that?
 
Deuce said:
They conquered a significant portion of SE Asia and fought off a far more powerful nation for years. I'd say they did pretty well, considering.

I could extrapolate your post to assume you meant gays in the military caused Japan to lose WW2, but I don't think in absolutes like that, so I'll assume you meant something else by your statement.
Click to expand...

You can make of it what you please. I'm just pointing out an historical fact.






Redress said:
Because they allowed gays to serve? Or because of other factors?
Click to expand...

There's never any single factor that results in winning, or losing a war. There were multiple factors that caused the Japanese to lose. However, one prominent factor that caused the Japanese defeat, was the American soldier was a superior fighter.
 
Deuce said:
Wait. Do we allow that?
Click to expand...

Not unless you want to totally cheapen what's been gained. If this happens, the next public opinion poll may not be as favorable.

They got what they wanted. It's time to be happy with that and let's move forward.
 
apdst said:
There's never any single factor that results in winning, or losing a war. There were multiple factors that caused the Japanese to lose. However, one prominent factor that caused the Japanese defeat, was the American soldier was a superior fighter.
Click to expand...

Which has exactly nothing to do with their orientation. By the way, the US had gay soldiers too in WW2 you know, most famously Gore Vidal and that Brigadier under MacArthur.

By the way, I am not finding any references to gay solders in japan in WW2, can you show me a source. I am kinda curious now.
 
apdst said:
There's never any single factor that results in winning, or losing a war. There were multiple factors that caused the Japanese to lose. However, one prominent factor that caused the Japanese defeat, was the American soldier was a superior fighter.
Click to expand...

I think the factor that we had a bunch of brainy Jews build us a super bomb, might be a tad more promiment.
 
apdst said:
You can make of it what you please. I'm just pointing out an historical fact.








There's never any single factor that results in winning, or losing a war. There were multiple factors that caused the Japanese to lose. However, one prominent factor that caused the Japanese defeat, was the American soldier was a superior fighter.
Click to expand...

I would say the more prominent factor was superior naval and aviation hardware and a larger production base, combined with better maneuvering tactics on the seas. Also, we figured out nukes first.

I'd also say queers had nothing to do with anything.
 
The Cynic said:
This might be the funniest thing I've ever read.
Click to expand...

Why, because, like lesbians, NP is fond of strap-ons too?

Seriously, though, guess he should be given certain propers. He is here participating on this thread even though he has to eat a lot of crow today.
 
Redress said:
Which has exactly nothing to do with their orientation. By the way, the US had gay soldiers too in WW2 you know, most famously Gore Vidal and that Brigadier under MacArthur.
Click to expand...



Got any numbers on that?

By the way, I am not finding any references to gay solders in japan in WW2, can you show me a source. I am kinda curious now.
Click to expand...

You'll never find any numbers concerning gays serving in the Japanese Army during WW2. They never had an anti-gay policy, because of their denial of the existance of gays.
 
apdst said:
Got any numbers on that?
Click to expand...

Nope. Just those examples.

You'll never find any numbers concerning gays serving in the Japanese Army during WW2. They never had an anti-gay policy, because of their denial of the existance of gays.
Click to expand...

Was not looking for numbers, and it isn't a big deal. I just got curious and tried to see what was said about it and found nothing.
 
CriticalThought said:
I think the factor that we had a bunch of brainy Jews build us a super bomb, might be a tad more promiment.
Click to expand...

That had more to do with when the Japanese surrender, not if they surrendered.

The Manhatten Project wasn't made up of all Jews. Nice racist remark, though.
 
CriticalThought said:
Are you factoring in Pearl Harbor for these "better maneuvering tactics"? :)
Click to expand...

No. In that instance, the superior homosexual tactics employed by the Japanese was the decisive factor.
 
Deuce said:
I would say the more prominent factor was superior naval and aviation hardware and a larger production base, combined with better maneuvering tactics on the seas.
Click to expand...

Had to have men to use that equipment. And, no war has been won without putting grunts on the ground to defeat the enemy in close quarter combat. You think the superior tactics and equipment would have meant jack ****, without marines and soldiers to assault those island bases?


Also, we figured out nukes first.

Didn't have anything to do with Japan's defeat.

I'd also say queers had nothing to do with anything.
Click to expand...

Your entitled to your opinion, but you have nothing to back that up with.
 
apdst said:
Your entitled to your opinion, but you have nothing to back that up with.
Click to expand...

Which is precisely the amount of evidence that supports the idea that homosexuals have a negative impact on military performance.
 
apdst said:
Had to have men to use that equipment. And, no war has been won without putting grunts on the ground to defeat the enemy in close quarter combat. You think the superior tactics and equipment would have meant jack ****, without marines and soldiers to assault those island bases?


Also, we figured out nukes first.

Didn't have anything to do with Japan's defeat.



Your entitled to your opinion, but you have nothing to back that up with.
Click to expand...

The US won not only because we had better troops. In fact, to start we really didn't have better troops. We won because of superior tactics, better equipment, a willingness to do what it took to win, larger manpower and industrial pools, technical superiority, and other things. If gays did more commonly serve in the japanese military than in the US military(so far nothing to actually back that up, though it may very well be true), it affects only one aspect. There is no evidence to suggest that gays had any impact on Japanese effectiveness in WW2 that I can find, either to make it better or worse.
 
Deuce said:
Which is precisely the amount of evidence that supports the idea that homosexuals have a negative impact on military performance.
Click to expand...

I have more evidence than you do.
 
Redress said:
The US won not only because we had better troops. In fact, to start we really didn't have better troops. We won because of superior tactics, better equipment, a willingness to do what it took to win, larger manpower and industrial pools, technical superiority, and other things. If gays did more commonly serve in the japanese military than in the US military(so far nothing to actually back that up, though it may very well be true), it affects only one aspect. There is no evidence to suggest that gays had any impact on Japanese effectiveness in WW2 that I can find, either to make it better or worse.
Click to expand...

I never said it was. I only pointed an historical reference and you all freak out over it and mae something out of nothing.
 
apdst said:
I never said it was. I only pointed an historical reference and you all freak out over it and mae something out of nothing.
Click to expand...

My reaction was anything but freaked out. My reaction was curiosity at a historical detail I had never heard before and trying to find out more. I am not a WW2 expert or anything, but I do have a nice section of WW2 books(and will probably get another couple for Xmas) and have a real curiosity on the subject.
 
apdst said:
It should be a victory for our armed forces. Anything else and it was a waste of time.
Click to expand...

A very very true statement. In this case I think it is a victory for our military.
 
Well the supporters of DADT obviously have better things to do than answer my questions but I’ll ask again:

Of those countries that don’t have a homosexual ban, who among them allow for a homosexual to sue the military for discrimination?

Many of you keep touting the fact that the US is one of the last to take such a step yet you won’t think about the reasons {they don’t have bans} just like you won’t think about how this legislation can harm {our} military.
 
Last edited:
GPS_Flex said:
Well, the supporters of DADT obviously have better things to do than answer my questions but I’ll ask again:

Of those countries that don’t have a homosexual ban, who among them allow for a homosexual to sue the military for discrimination?

Many of you keep touting the fact that the US is one of the last to take such a step yet you won’t think about the reasons just like you won’t think about how this legislation can harm the military.
Click to expand...

Since you are curious about this, I would recommend looking it up. Let us know.
 
GPS_Flex said:
Many of you keep touting the fact that the US is one of the last to take such a step yet you won’t think about the reasons just like you won’t think about how this legislation can harm the military.
Click to expand...

That's just it, in the long term I think it will make our military better. Of course there will be some incidents just like even today we have issues with racial and gender discrimination. But they are a small fraction to the whole of the military.
 
Redress said:
Since you are curious about this, I would recommend looking it up. Let us know.
Click to expand...

I don’t need to look it up. I know that Russia doesn’t have a ban against gays because gays don’t have any rights.

It’s easy for you folks to throw out examples of how bigoted the US is when you don’t bother to think things through to their logical conclusions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom