Army, Air Force, Marine Chiefs Against DADT Repeal

[Valin]

The Weekly Standard:

JOHN MCCORMACK
12/3/10

At today's Senate hearing, three of the four service chiefs expressed opposition to repealing the Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT) policy on gays in the military. "My recommendation is that we should not implement repeal at this time," said Marine Corps commandant General James F. Amos (watch his opening statement here). "I cannot reconcile, nor turn my back on the Marines most engaged in the day-to-day work of operations in Afghanistan," said Amos. The Pentagon's survey showed that 67% of Marines in combat arms units--infantry, artillery, armor--believe repealing DADT would have a negative effect on their unit's performance.

(Snip)

While the chief of the Navy, Admiral Gary Roughead, supports repeal, the chiefs of the Army and Air Force do not. Said Army Chief of Staff General George Casey: "Implementation of repeal of DADT in the near term will 1) add another level of stress to an already stretched force; 2) be more difficult in combat arms; and 3) be more difficult for the Army than the report suggests."

"I believe that the law should be repealed eventually," Casey said later under questioning from Senator John McCain. "I would not recommend going forward at this time."
(Snip)

[Casino67]

I heard some pundit wonder if this would be a campaign issue in 2012.

 

I believe it may affect the amount of donations from certain groups but I don't think it will be a talking point for the general electorate.

 

Any thoughts?

[SrWoodchuck]

I heard some pundit wonder if this would be a campaign issue in 2012.

 

I believe it may affect the amount of donations from certain groups but I don't think it will be a talking point for the general electorate.

 

Any thoughts?

Casino67!

 

You asked. I'll tell: I think doing away with DADT in the middle of a war; sucks.

 

[This opinion is strictly from my heterosexual point of view; and does not in any way relate to my lesbian feminine side]

 

On a more serious note, I've heard that homosexuals serving in war zones are accepted, if they are not aggressive about their sexual preference.

 

I see this as just another link in the Homosexual lobby's game plan. They don't want acceptance, they demand approval.

 

The Federal government has no business creating more problems for our military's ability to be a cohesive fighting force......as an attempt to make all things PC. Some things are never going to be PC. Like killing the enemy. Anything that interferes with that basic job, needs to go away.

[AceRimmer]

If gays want to be rear-echelon supply types, fine, but I'm sure every soldier and Marine in the combat arms are opposed to this madness. My enlistment in the Army Nat'l Guard ended in December, '92 and if Bush the Elder had been reelected, I'd have reupped.

 

Instead, King Bubba won, and the first thing he announced was allowing gays in the military. Those of us who were short-timers couldn't get out the door fast enough. And when asked why we wouldn't reup, every single one of us said it was Clinton's promise to open the door to gays for any MOS.

 

I've worked with gays and lesbians in civilian life, but the last person I want next to me in a foxhole is a flaming queen.

[Valin]

I heard some pundit wonder if this would be a campaign issue in 2012.

 

I believe it may affect the amount of donations from certain groups but I don't think it will be a talking point for the general electorate.

 

Any thoughts?

Casino67!

 

You asked. I'll tell: I think doing away with DADT in the middle of a war; sucks.

 

[This opinion is strictly from my heterosexual point of view; and does not in any way relate to my lesbian feminine side]

 

On a more serious note, I've heard that homosexuals serving in war zones are accepted, if they are not aggressive about their sexual preference.

 

I see this as just another link in the Homosexual lobby's game plan. They don't want acceptance, they demand approval.

 

The Federal government has no business creating more problems for our military's ability to be a cohesive fighting force......as an attempt to make all things PC. Some things are never going to be PC. Like killing the enemy. Anything that interferes with that basic job, needs to go away.

 

 

I believe you've hit the nail on the head.