• 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!

Navy opens investigation into raunchy videos

Yep according to the book they are both violations even though the ideas being communicated are miles apart.

That's right, which makes neither excusable.
 
You still haven't answered the question. Is dismissal the only sanction available under the Court Martial or does it depend on the circumstances?

He could go to prison. Is that what you mean?
 
He could go to prison. Is that what you mean?

No. What I mean is "What are the available sanctions"?

If dismissal is the only sanction, the by all means both should be dismissed.

If there are multiple sanctions available depending on the egrigiousness of the offense, then you cannot simply argue that they both should be treated the same. Perhaps the level of egrigiousness is the same...and if it is, then absolutely they should be treated the same.
 
one solution that is absolutely not available to us is to allow service members to think for themselves. mindless robots are way better killers than a critically thinking man being weighed down by morals and feelings.
 
No. What I mean is "What are the available sanctions"?

If dismissal is the only sanction, the by all means both should be dismissed.

If there are multiple sanctions available depending on the egrigiousness of the offense, then you cannot simply argue that they both should be treated the same. Perhaps the level of egrigiousness is the same...and if it is, then absolutely they should be treated the same.

Yeah, I guess one could go to the stockade, while one is simply cashiered. The end result either way would be a dishonarble discharge.
 
one solution that is absolutely not available to us is to allow service members to think for themselves. mindless robots are way better killers than a critically thinking man being weighed down by morals and feelings.

That's inaccurate. The military encourages soldiers to think for themselves. It's just that there are regulations in place as to how they are allowed to do so.

Dan Choi, for instance, could have 1) not worn his uniform to a political rally and 2) not broke the law and he wouldn't be in violation of any regulation. However, he chose not to do that. If his judgement is those instance were that poor, then his judgement as an infantry officer, leading men into battle must come into question. IOW, if he's too stupid to leave his uniform at home, he's too stupid to lead men into battle. Someone that stupid will get people killed, because of their poor judgment and bad decisions.
 
That's inaccurate. The military encourages soldiers to think for themselves. It's just that there are regulations in place as to how they are allowed to do so.

anyone else see this contradiction? or does the military CoC prevent you from seeing it? if you call yourself very conservative i hope you've read 1984 and you know what double think is. list your values then try to fit this argument into them. i did exactly that (after leaving the military) and am no longer 'very conservative'. another piece that will help you: The Unthinking Right by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
 
I mean they are different, one is derogatory frat boy antics while the other is a political statement.

I actually think what Choi did was worse on an individual basis. A military involved in politics is a dangerous combination. I have no sympathy for a service member who is disciplined because they made a political statement.
 
Dan Choi, for instance, could have 1) not worn his uniform to a political rally and 2) not broke the law and he wouldn't be in violation of any regulation. However, he chose not to do that. If his judgement is those instance were that poor, then his judgement as an infantry officer, leading men into battle must come into question. IOW, if he's too stupid to leave his uniform at home, he's too stupid to lead men into battle. Someone that stupid will get people killed, because of their poor judgment and bad decisions.

I understand what you're saying.

I think that what other people are saying is that there is a difference between civil disobedience for a higher purpose (Dan Choi) and frat boy antics.

However, IN TERMS OF PENALTIES, by the military, they are the same, for all intents and purposes. Dan Choi should not be allowed to return to serve as an officer because his conduct in the service was in violation of the law, and was unbecoming to an officer. THAT is the penalty for his civil disobedience.

Civil disobedience can be a noble action, but it is not without cost. Dan Choi will have to pay the cost for his actions, even though his cause has been vindicated. And, that is as it should be.

People these days want civil disobedience to be free. It isn't, and never has been. Sometimes, you have to be willing to sacrifice in order to make change. This was Dan Choi's personal sacrifice which he made on behalf of other people. Good on him, but he shouldn't be allowed back in uniform.

It is what it is.
 
No. What I mean is "What are the available sanctions"?

If dismissal is the only sanction, the by all means both should be dismissed.

If there are multiple sanctions available depending on the egrigiousness of the offense, then you cannot simply argue that they both should be treated the same. Perhaps the level of egrigiousness is the same...and if it is, then absolutely they should be treated the same.

He could be busted in rank, the military could decline to pick up his re-inlistment or he could have a black mark onhis records, effectively preventing him from getting promoted, ever. Those are other punishments I've heard of.
 
I actually think what Choi did was worse on an individual basis. A military involved in politics is a dangerous combination. I have no sympathy for a service member who is disciplined because they made a political statement.

The SLDN(Servicemembers Legal Defense Network is the leading advocacy group for gays in the military and have been quite clear in advising any one in the service to not make public political comments on DADT.
 
Back
Top Bottom