Page 12 of 19 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 184

Thread: "Don't ask, don't tell" cost tops $50,000 per expulsion, study finds

  1. #111
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,107

    Re: "Don't ask, don't tell" cost tops $50,000 per expulsion, study finds

    Quote Originally Posted by SheWolf View Post
    I can manage to be professional with people I am even attracted to, can you not do the same?
    i usually can, yes. however, the vast majority of the military - especially the combat arms - are 18 to 22 year old males; who are generally a not a demographic known for their ability to ignore the demands of their private parts.

    What is your point?
    i am 27, and married (not that that always makes a difference, either, which is another ball of wax).

  2. #112
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,444

    Re: "Don't ask, don't tell" cost tops $50,000 per expulsion, study finds

    How often are you cuddling with other guys in your unit? Last I checked, you guys get bunks, even in the field, most of the time.
    You better check again!

    That just goes to show that you have a complete lack of understanding. You have no knowledge, nor comprehension of how things work in a combat arms unit. You've never served in one and you've never received any kind of close quarter combat training. Niether an opinion poll, nor a civilian study is going to fill that void.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  3. #113
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: "Don't ask, don't tell" cost tops $50,000 per expulsion, study finds

    You know what, I am really getting tired of being told that my experience working with openly gay men and women, in close quarters, in the military is worth crap because it wasn't in a combat arms position. I never once said that I based my knowledge or how I see things going just off of my experience or even just off of an opinion poll. I will admit that I was using the field wrongly to describe the entire combat zone, not just those times when you are actually off base. I apologize for that. However, the rest of that paragraph still stands. You would still be sharing those tents or trucks with those same gay guys with or without DADT in place. One policy/rule is not more powerful than others. I highly doubt that anyone would truly fear being kicked out more than they would being put in the brig or beat the crap our of or possibly even killed by trying something stupid while you are in those tents or whereever you may be cuddling up to another guy.

    And I may not have personal experience with going into combat zones or field training, but my husband and brother both have such experience. And they have told me stuff about their experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan. From what they have told me, most of that time in those zones, they were not sleeping out in the open or even in a tent. They were sleeping at a base or FOB or in their trucks. Most of their experience in tents was during training. Now maybe you guys experienced something different. I was going off of what I have been told by others in combat units.

    The point I was making still stands so how bout you guys address my points instead of attacking me or anyone else. Because neither of you have provided any information that says that your opinion on what might happen has been formed directly from your experience working with openly gays soldiers while in combat units. And without that experience, you honestly don't know how every or even most of the guys in those combat units will honestly feel or react to openly gay guys working with them. You can only speculate.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  4. #114
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,444

    Re: "Don't ask, don't tell" cost tops $50,000 per expulsion, study finds

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    You know what, I am really getting tired of being told that my experience working with openly gay men and women, in close quarters, in the military is worth crap because it wasn't in a combat arms position. I never once said that I based my knowledge or how I see things going just off of my experience or even just off of an opinion poll. I will admit that I was using the field wrongly to describe the entire combat zone, not just those times when you are actually off base. I apologize for that. However, the rest of that paragraph still stands. You would still be sharing those tents or trucks with those same gay guys with or without DADT in place. One policy/rule is not more powerful than others. I highly doubt that anyone would truly fear being kicked out more than they would being put in the brig or beat the crap our of or possibly even killed by trying something stupid while you are in those tents or whereever you may be cuddling up to another guy.


    The point I was making still stands so how bout you guys address my points instead of attacking me or anyone else. Because neither of you have provided any information that says that your opinion on what might happen has been formed directly from your experience working with openly gays soldiers while in combat units. And without that experience, you honestly don't know how every or even most of the guys in those combat units will honestly feel or react to openly gay guys working with them. You can only speculate.
    I'm even more tireder of being told that I don't know how things work in a combat arms unit, by people whho have never spent a single day in uniform and, if they did spend time in the service, served in POG jobs and have zero experience working in ground units.

    And I may not have personal experience with going into combat zones or field training, but my husband and brother both have such experience. And they have told me stuff about their experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan. From what they have told me, most of that time in those zones, they were not sleeping out in the open or even in a tent. They were sleeping at a base or FOB or in their trucks.
    Good thing they weren't in my platoon. I would have Article 15'ed every one of them for sleeping in their vehicles.

    When you put 4, or 5, or 8 soldiers in a vehicle, you give the enemy the oppurtunity to take out all those soldiers with one shot. Obviously, your old man andd your brother didn't serve in combat arms units.


    Most of their experience in tents was during training. Now maybe you guys experienced something different. I was going off of what I have been told by others in combat units.
    Oh yeah! My experience was much different.
    Last edited by apdst; 01-25-11 at 03:41 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  5. #115
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: "Don't ask, don't tell" cost tops $50,000 per expulsion, study finds

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    I'm even more tireder of being told that I don't know how things work in a combat arms unit, by people whho have never spent a single day in uniform and, if they did spend time in the service, served in POG jobs and have zero experience working in ground units.
    You are trying to assert that you know something will happen because of your experience. It isn't that easy to assert such a thing. You don't have the necessary experience to assert such a thing. You have your experience, and it does give you some perspective into problems that might come about. But you cannot assert that openly gay personnel will cause problems with unit cohesion with no experience working with openly gay personnel in those units. The only thing that you can assert from such experience is that they might cause issues with unit cohesion. Your use of absolutes is the major thing that I take issue with in these discussions. You expect others to accept what you are saying despite them giving you other evidence that goes against your assertions just because you believe that your experience means more, even when some of that contradictory evidence from other sources have the same combat unit experience as you, along with the experience of working with openly gay personnel in their combat units. I have not attacked your experience from serving in a combat unit. What I attack is your assertion that your opinion means more or others' opinions mean less because you have served in combat units in regards to this debate.

    Which, btw, my husband did just confirm to me that he did work with openly gay personnel in his combat units. No problems arose from this.

    Is it possible that problems could arise from having openly gay personnel in their units? Yes, absolutely. Is it likely to occur? Most likely we will see at least an incident or two because somebody else was not comfortable with serving with openly. And it is even likely that we will see some incidents where some gay person tried to make unwanted advances toward someone else and either causes issues of trust (although if the rules are as enforced as they were with DADT then the gay person should be punished accordingly) or the gay guy/gal will find themselves harmed because of it. What is not likely is that most units will have multiple gay guys in them and those guys will be in relationships with each other or even having sex with each other while on duty. Some might, most won't. What is not likely is that most units will no longer trust the gay guy enough to allow it to affect their ability to do their job. A few might, but this can be taken care of with good leadership. Most units won't see any issues.

    And almost every issue that you guys try to claim will occur because of gays or is there because of gays are there with or without DADT. DADT is not a magical law that automatically makes people behave. It is not that great of a law at all. It has led to way more discharges than were necessary to ever ensure good order and discipline. Most of those discharged were not behavior problems that would have caused issues with unit cohesion or discipline. And those that would have caused such issues could have been dealt with by charging them with other rules already in place.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  6. #116
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,444

    Re: "Don't ask, don't tell" cost tops $50,000 per expulsion, study finds

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    You are trying to assert that you know something will happen because of your experience. It isn't that easy to assert such a thing. You don't have the necessary experience to assert such a thing. You have your experience, and it does give you some perspective into problems that might come about. But you cannot assert that openly gay personnel will cause problems with unit cohesion with no experience working with openly gay personnel in those units. The only thing that you can assert from such experience is that they might cause issues with unit cohesion. Your use of absolutes is the major thing that I take issue with in these discussions. You expect others to accept what you are saying despite them giving you other evidence that goes against your assertions just because you believe that your experience means more, even when some of that contradictory evidence from other sources have the same combat unit experience as you, along with the experience of working with openly gay personnel in their combat units. I have not attacked your experience from serving in a combat unit. What I attack is your assertion that your opinion means more or others' opinions mean less because you have served in combat units in regards to this debate.
    You're basing your opinion on an opinion poll. I'm basing mine on real world experience. Let's see...

    Which, btw, my husband did just confirm to me that he did work with openly gay personnel in his combat units. No problems arose from this.
    What kind of combat arms unit did your hubby serve in? If he was lseeping in his truck, then it must not have been a combat arms unit.

    Is it possible that problems could arise from having openly gay personnel in their units? Yes, absolutely. Is it likely to occur? Most likely we will see at least an incident or two because somebody else was not comfortable with serving with openly. And it is even likely that we will see some incidents where some gay person tried to make unwanted advances toward someone else and either causes issues of trust (although if the rules are as enforced as they were with DADT then the gay person should be punished accordingly) or the gay guy/gal will find themselves harmed because of it. What is not likely is that most units will have multiple gay guys in them and those guys will be in relationships with each other or even having sex with each other while on duty. Some might, most won't. What is not likely is that most units will no longer trust the gay guy enough to allow it to affect their ability to do their job. A few might, but this can be taken care of with good leadership. Most units won't see any issues.

    And almost every issue that you guys try to claim will occur because of gays or is there because of gays are there with or without DADT. DADT is not a magical law that automatically makes people behave. It is not that great of a law at all. It has led to way more discharges than were necessary to ever ensure good order and discipline. Most of those discharged were not behavior problems that would have caused issues with unit cohesion or discipline. And those that would have caused such issues could have been dealt with by charging them with other rules already in place.
    You will see problems. Mark my words
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  7. #117
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: "Don't ask, don't tell" cost tops $50,000 per expulsion, study finds

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    You're basing your opinion on an opinion poll. I'm basing mine on real world experience. Let's see...



    What kind of combat arms unit did your hubby serve in? If he was lseeping in his truck, then it must not have been a combat arms unit.



    You will see problems. Mark my words
    My husband was a tow gunner. He certainly was in a combat unit, in the Marines. My brother was telling me about sleeping in his truck while in training. I honestly don't know if he slept there while in Iraq. Either way, it is not like all of them would have been sleeping at once. To believe that they were, would be ignorant. And if you guys were all in your field tents while in Iraq or Afghanistan combat zones, then you would have also been vulnerable to enemy fire unless you were in a FOB or on an actual base from the way I understand how that stuff works. That comment was being made against the claim that you guys share sleeping spaces often with other men, as in so close that you cuddle.

    So then if I'm wrong, tell me how many days out of say 100 in a combat zone or during training do you guys actually share your 2 man tents? How many days in a year? And is it really such an issue that you could sleep with a straight smelly guy, but not a gay guy just because he comes out as gay? And why only after DADT is repealed? That same gay guy could have been suspected to be gay during DADT. How would that be handled if there was no proof? And what about the fact that many of those gays that are in those units now have been sharing those same tents with those same fellow soldiers, many for years and many tours, yet they were still able to control themselves? I guarantee you that the sole reason that they were able to control themselves was not DADT being in place.

    You guys are not addressing everything. You are insisting that you know what will happen, even go so far to assert that there will be casualties in combat just due to a decline in unit cohesion because of allowing gays to serve openly. You have no proof that this will happen. You don't even have any evidence that suggest that it might happen, since the majority of those in combat units who have actually served with openly gay guys have said that they have seen no effect on unit cohesion at all. And no countries that have allowed gays to serve openly have seen this either, despite the fact that a) they had the same fears that you guys have and b) many have seen combat since the time that they allowed gays to serve openly and c) they have the same age groups of soldiers on the front lines that the US does. Maturity of young men is the same whether you are talking about a Brit or American or Australian. Those other countries' soldiers are not more mature than ours.

    Also, you still haven't provided even one example of a problem that could happen that wouldn't be covered by another rule. If your contention is that the other rules don't work because they are not enforced often enough or enforced fairly, then why do you believe that DADT could be enforced so well but those other rules can't be?
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  8. #118
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,444

    Re: "Don't ask, don't tell" cost tops $50,000 per expulsion, study finds

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    My husband was a tow gunner. He certainly was in a combat unit, in the Marines.
    An 0351? Is that correct?


    My brother was telling me about sleeping in his truck while in training. I honestly don't know if he slept there while in Iraq. Either way, it is not like all of them would have been sleeping at once. To believe that they were, would be ignorant.
    Depends on the level of security, which is all MET-TW (mission, enemy, time, terrain, weather), whether it's 25%, 50% or 100% security. If a platoon is at 25% security, that means that 20-odd soldiers are going to sleeping, all at once.




    And if you guys were all in your field tents while in Iraq or Afghanistan combat zones, then you would have also been vulnerable to enemy fire unless you were in a FOB or on an actual base from the way I understand how that stuff works.
    You don't sleep in your tent when you're in an assembly area. Probably wouldn't even bring it.

    That comment was being made against the claim that you guys share sleeping spaces often with other men, as in so close that you cuddle.
    Well, if it's -30, yeah, soldiers are going to spoon. Been there, done that.

    So then if I'm wrong, tell me how many days out of say 100 in a combat zone or during training do you guys actually share your 2 man tents? How many days in a year? And is it really such an issue that you could sleep with a straight smelly guy, but not a gay guy just because he comes out as gay? And why only after DADT is repealed? That same gay guy could have been suspected to be gay during DADT. How would that be handled if there was no proof? And what about the fact that many of those gays that are in those units now have been sharing those same tents with those same fellow soldiers, many for years and many tours, yet they were still able to control themselves? I guarantee you that the sole reason that they were able to control themselves was not DADT being in place.
    In a tent? Probably zero. But, in a 2x3 fighting position, probably 90% of those 100 days. But again, it's all MET-TW.

    You guys are not addressing everything. You are insisting that you know what will happen, even go so far to assert that there will be casualties in combat just due to a decline in unit cohesion because of allowing gays to serve openly. You have no proof that this will happen. You don't even have any evidence that suggest that it might happen, since the majority of those in combat units who have actually served with openly gay guys have said that they have seen no effect on unit cohesion at all. And no countries that have allowed gays to serve openly have seen this either, despite the fact that a) they had the same fears that you guys have and b) many have seen combat since the time that they allowed gays to serve openly and c) they have the same age groups of soldiers on the front lines that the US does. Maturity of young men is the same whether you are talking about a Brit or American or Australian. Those other countries' soldiers are not more mature than ours.
    We have addressed everything. One of the points I've brought up is housing. Housing is going to be an issue. You can spout the, "they'll do as they're told and like it", all you want, but it just don't work like that.

    Also, you still haven't provided even one example of a problem that could happen that wouldn't be covered by another rule. If your contention is that the other rules don't work because they are not enforced often enough or enforced fairly, then why do you believe that DADT could be enforced so well but those other rules can't be?
    You've blown off every single thing we've said, claiming that we don't know what we're talking about.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  9. #119
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: "Don't ask, don't tell" cost tops $50,000 per expulsion, study finds

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    An 0351? Is that correct?
    I don't remember, and he is at training right now, so I can't ask him.


    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Depends on the level of security, which is all MET-TW (mission, enemy, time, terrain, weather), whether it's 25%, 50% or 100% security. If a platoon is at 25% security, that means that 20-odd soldiers are going to sleeping, all at once.
    Since I was specifically talking about them sleeping in their trucks, then no, they would not have all been sleeping at the same time. That would be stupid of them. Most likely they were rotating one or two sleeping, while the others provided lookout, and they most likely didn't stay whereever they were long. And my husband was a Marine. His unit did not have 20 soldiers at a time on the same mission usually.

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    You don't sleep in your tent when you're in an assembly area. Probably wouldn't even bring it.

    Well, if it's -30, yeah, soldiers are going to spoon. Been there, done that.

    In a tent? Probably zero. But, in a 2x3 fighting position, probably 90% of those 100 days. But again, it's all MET-TW.
    I was asking specifics because you guys are claiming that I am wrong. So tell me, specifically where I am wrong in saying that in Iraq and Afghanistan, most combat soldiers are not going to be spending most of their time cuddled together?

    And addressing the rest of what I ask would go a long way in helping your argument. But you constantly pick little parts or just one sentence that I type and address that, many times taking it out of the context that the sentence was used.


    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    We have addressed everything. One of the points I've brought up is housing. Housing is going to be an issue. You can spout the, "they'll do as they're told and like it", all you want, but it just don't work like that.
    You have said that housing will be an issue because we separate men and women due to harassment issues. It has been explained to you multiple times that gay men are not women. The sexual harassment issue is not the only issue that keeps men and women in separate berthings. And even if it were, it would be because of the high potential for it to happen if 90-95% or more of the berthing is potentially attracted to each other, vice only 1-2% (possibly a little more) potentially being attracted to each other and the others in berthing. And, the average woman is less likely to be able to defend herself from an attack by the average sized man in a unit than a man is.

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    You've blown off every single thing we've said, claiming that we don't know what we're talking about.
    The only times that I have blown you off is when you make claims that the other rules in place are not adequate to deal with potential issues or when you don't know the rules well. Or that soldiers should not talk about their personal lives on duty. One you have provided nothing to support for it except something about women being treated differently (which would not apply to gay men). The second is unrealistic. And the last one has happened when dealing with unlawful orders and, I believe, fraternization rules.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  10. #120
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,444

    Re: "Don't ask, don't tell" cost tops $50,000 per expulsion, study finds

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Since I was specifically talking about them sleeping in their trucks, then no, they would not have all been sleeping at the same time. That would be stupid of them. Most likely they were rotating one or two sleeping, while the others provided lookout, and they most likely didn't stay whereever they were long. And my husband was a Marine. His unit did not have 20 soldiers at a time on the same mission usually.
    You're probably wrong there.





    I was asking specifics because you guys are claiming that I am wrong. So tell me, specifically where I am wrong in saying that in Iraq and Afghanistan, most combat soldiers are not going to be spending most of their time cuddled together?
    Iraq and Afghanistan are the Alpha amd Omega of ground combat that American soldiers will participate in.

    See these two soldiers? I bet they huddled together to stay warm during the Battle of The Bulge.



    And addressing the rest of what I ask would go a long way in helping your argument. But you constantly pick little parts or just one sentence that I type and address that, many times taking it out of the context that the sentence was used.
    It's because the rest of the paragraph is irrelevant.




    You have said that housing will be an issue because we separate men and women due to harassment issues. It has been explained to you multiple times that gay men are not women.
    It's been explained to you, not only by myself, that you can't force gay and straight soldiers to billet together. It just ain't gonna happen.


    The sexual harassment issue is not the only issue that keeps men and women in separate berthings. And even if it were, it would be because of the high potential for it to happen if 90-95% or more of the berthing is potentially attracted to each other, vice only 1-2% (possibly a little more) potentially being attracted to each other and the others in berthing. And, the average woman is less likely to be able to defend herself from an attack by the average sized man in a unit than a man is.
    The prevention of sexual harassment is probably the #1 issue.



    The only times that I have blown you off is when you make claims that the other rules in place are not adequate to deal with potential issues or when you don't know the rules well. Or that soldiers should not talk about their personal lives on duty. One you have provided nothing to support for it except something about women being treated differently (which would not apply to gay men). The second is unrealistic. And the last one has happened when dealing with unlawful orders and, I believe, fraternization rules.

    Sexual harasssment and fraternization policies don't prevent sexual harassment and fraternization 100%. One instance of fraternization in a combat arms unit, could spell real trouble. You have to consider that, currently, fraternization and improper relations aren't a problem within combat arms units. In the future, they will become a problem.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

Page 12 of 19 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... 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
  •