NeoConMan Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Pentagon: No plans to end don't ask-don't tell Associated Press WASHINGTON (AP) - The Pentagon says it has no plans to repeal the don't ask-don't tell policy for gay troops. Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said Tuesday that the military's top leaders have only had initial discussions with the White House about whether gay troops should be open about their sexuality. Under current rules, openly gay troops can be discharged from the U.S. military. Morrell said the White House has not asked for the 1993 policy to be scrapped. "I do not believe there are any plans under way in this building for some expected, but not articulated, anticipation that don't ask-don't tell will be repealed," Morrell told reporters at the Pentagon. President Barack Obama committed during the 2008 presidential campaign to moving to end the Clinton administration-era policy. The 1993 law was enacted as a compromise between openly gay people serving in the armed forces and those opposed to gays in uniform. Morrell said Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen both have discussed the issue with Obama. "They're aware of where the president wants to go on this issue, but I don't think that there is any sense of any immediate developments in the offing on efforts to repeal don't ask-don't tell," Morrell said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djroge1 Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 From what I saw, this was never a good policy. Of course, it possible that perhaps there were some who never told and thier gay choice was well hidden or not obvious. The few I knew of, it was obvious and it made for very uncomfortable work enviornments for most if not all and eventually they either left the military or were kicked out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GIANTRobOT420 Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 ****** bag rides again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grampa Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 This was a bad compromise and will end sometime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSG_Standard Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Why do people have to let other's know what their sexual preferences are? I thought it was private information...What a crazy world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grampa Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Why do people have to let other's know what their sexual preferences are? I thought it was private information...What a crazy world. What? You don't want anyone knowing who you are married to or involved with? In some cases, it just happens that some people are gay. It should be treated the same as a non-gay person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSG_Standard Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 What? You don't want anyone knowing who you are married to or involved with? In some cases' date=' it just happens that some people are gay. It should be treated the same as a non-gay person.[/quote'] As far as I know, dating fellow soldiers is frowned upon for either sex. My point is that nobody (other than your partner) needs to know your sexual preference do they? I've never found a need to tell strangers, bosses or people other than my spouse what my preferences are. I don't care if people are gay, I don't care what they do in the privacy of their own homes or in their off duty hours in private. There is NO right to serve in the military, it's a volunteer force. If you can't follow the rules, don't join. Seems pretty simple to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeoConMan Posted May 19, 2009 Author Share Posted May 19, 2009 ****** bag rides again! You're back!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homz Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 As far as I know' date=' dating fellow soldiers is frowned upon for either sex. My point is that nobody (other than your partner) needs to know your sexual preference do they? I've never found a need to tell strangers, bosses or people other than my spouse what my preferences are. I don't care if people are gay, I don't care what they do in the privacy of their own homes or in their off duty hours in private. There is NO right to serve in the military, it's a volunteer force. If you can't follow the rules, don't join. Seems pretty simple to me.[/quote'] What they should really regulate is the influx of rich white kids who would have attended great colleges, but instead decided to serve their country. No, wait.... the military doesn't have any of them. They become republican politicians and send the mostly inner city poor to fight their battles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSG_Standard Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 What they should really regulate is the influx of rich white kids who would have attended great colleges' date=' but instead decided to serve their country. No, wait.... the military doesn't have any of them. They become republican politicians and send the mostly inner city poor to fight their battles. [/quote'] Like Ted Kennedy? or Obonga? or Henry Waxman? or Bawney Fwank? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bscott Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 Pentagon: No plans to end don't ask-don't tell Associated Press WASHINGTON (AP) - The Pentagon says it has no plans to repeal the don't ask-don't tell policy for gay troops. Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said Tuesday that the military's top leaders have only had initial discussions with the White House about whether gay troops should be open about their sexuality. Under current rules' date=' openly gay troops can be discharged from the U.S. military. Morrell said the White House has not asked for the 1993 policy to be scrapped. "I do not believe there are any plans under way in this building for some expected, but not articulated, anticipation that don't ask-don't tell will be repealed," Morrell told reporters at the Pentagon. President Barack Obama committed during the 2008 presidential campaign to moving to end the Clinton administration-era policy. The 1993 law was enacted as a compromise between openly gay people serving in the armed forces and those opposed to gays in uniform. Morrell said Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen both have discussed the issue with Obama. "They're aware of where the president wants to go on this issue, but I don't think that there is any sense of any immediate developments in the offing on efforts to repeal don't ask-don't tell," Morrell said. Whats your point?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveinspain Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 Why do people have to let other's know what their sexual preferences are? I thought it was private information...What a crazy world. I'm a big guy so I was very obvious even in a crowd. It has boldly emblazoned on the front CHRISTIAN AMERICAN HETEROSEXUAL PRO-GUN CONSERVATIVE Any questions? I could never figure that one out either.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cookieman15061 Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 Whats your point?? Its a guitar forum who needs a point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bol316 Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 KSG_Standard wrote: Why do people have to let other's know what their sexual preferences are? I thought it was private information...What a crazy world. NeoConMan wrote: I'm a big guy so I was very obvious even in a crowd. It has boldly emblazoned on the front CHRISTIAN AMERICAN HETEROSEXUAL PRO-GUN CONSERVATIVE Any questions? daveinspain wrote: I could never figure that one out either.... Ya, I see what you mean. This proves that Neo indeed doesnt have an ego problem. Like I stated long ago. What a terrible thing for me to say. :( . Oh by the way Neo, if waterboarding isnt torture then why are you so vehemently defending their right to do it? And why are they even bothering to do it if it isnt torture? If its no big deal then why bother? Tick tock tick tock..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heymisterk Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 Whats your point?? Neo's point is that Obama changed his mind. I know that doing so is considered a mortal sin by the right; for enlightened people, it means adapting to real-world governing and compromise. Interestingly, Neo doesn't post articles with a negative connotation regarding Obama's decision to not release the graphic prisoner abuse photos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeoConMan Posted May 20, 2009 Author Share Posted May 20, 2009 Neo doesn't post articles with a negative connotation regarding Obama's decision to not release the graphic prisoner abuse photos. No extra credit given for doing what's RIGHT. I know Liberals need it in order to develop self-esteem, otherwise they remain morally and ethically void. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Californiaman Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 Waterboarding is simply a way to "enlighten" a man as to the seriousness of the situation he presently finds himself. If he wants to share some of that enlightenment with those doing the waterboarding, then that would be deemed a wise decision, thus negating the necessity of said waterboarding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homz Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 Waterboarding is simply a way to "enlighten" a man as to the seriousness of the situation he presently finds himself. If he wants to share some of that enlightenment with those doing the waterboarding' date=' then that would be deemed a wise decision, thus negating the necessity of said waterboarding.[/quote'] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeoConMan Posted May 20, 2009 Author Share Posted May 20, 2009 This proves that Neo indeed doesnt have an ego problem. If you believe I have an ego problem' date=' I'm fine with that. I'll continue to work on it for you! :-) I've had much worse said about me - by people I actually [i']know[/i] - and I survived just fine.... I think you have brain damage - so that's fair, eh? Neo' date=' if waterboarding isnt torture then why are you so vehemently defending their right to do it? [/quote']To piss off Liberals who wouldn't know torture from a haircut. Left to me, waterboarding wouldn't even have been used on the three Muslim captives that went through it. There are so many better, more effective ways to make homicidal, America-hating animals wish they had chosen a different line of work. Left to YOU, what would YOU do in order to extract info from said murderous captives? This is assuming there would even BE any captives in Bol's World.... Tick, Tock, Tick, Tock, Tick, Tock, Tick, Tock, Tick, Tock, Tick, Tock, Tick, Tock, Tick, Tock, Tick, Tock....... (This oughta be good!) :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homz Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 Daddy why is the sky blue. Because I say it is son now stop asking me stupid questions and pass me the ammo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVOL! Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 To piss off Liberals who wouldn't know torture from a haircut. Left to me' date=' waterboarding wouldn't even have been used on the three Muslim captives that went through it. There are so many better, more effective ways to make homicidal, America-hating animals wish they had chosen a different line of work. Left to YOU, what would [i']YOU[/i] do in order to extract info from said murderous captives? This is assuming there would even BE any captives in Bol's World.... I'll say it again for you - torture does not work. If I blind folded you, flew you to a foreign country, and waterboarded you for several days in a row you would admit to wearing woman's panties, smoking meth, and having sex with random men at rest stops. If your aim is to just punish people then my point is moot. You should read testimony by interrogators. Each one will tell you they get more credible intelligence by offering snacks and a pack of American cigarettes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homz Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 I'll say it again for you - torture does not work. If I blind folded you' date=' flew you to a foreign country, and waterboarded you for several days in a row you would admit to wearing woman's panties, smoking meth, and having sex with random men at rest stops. If your aim is to just punish people then my point is moot. [/quote'] He probably already does those things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bol316 Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 To piss off Liberals who wouldn't know torture from a haircut. Left to me' date=' waterboarding wouldn't even have been used on the three Muslim captives that went through it. There are so many better, more effective ways to make homicidal, America-hating animals wish they had chosen a different line of work. Left to YOU, what would [i']YOU[/i] do in order to extract info from said murderous captives? This is assuming there would even BE any captives in Bol's World.... Tick, Tock, Tick, Tock, Tick, Tock, Tick, Tock, Tick, Tock, Tick, Tock, Tick, Tock, Tick, Tock, Tick, Tock....... (This oughta be good!) :-) So you still have no legit answer to my question? If waterboarding is no big deal, why defend it so vehemently? We all know what torture is, and obviously are gluttons for it. Just look at how we try to bash some sense into you. =D> By the way, just wondering, were those 3 Muslims ever given a trial to prove their guilt before "enhanced interrogating" (HA HA HA gotta love people calling dog crap roses huh?) them? Or are we now at the "guilt by creed, race and/or geographical location" part of our downward spiral? Left to me they would sit in an empty cell, by themselves. Given zero entertainment. Until they decide to talk. No talk is better then "what do you want me to tell you" talk. Oh by the way, about your shirt, I can think of 1 question that I bet alot of people there had (and MANY MANY others out in the world would have): Who cares? Quick question for you, if you saw someone with a "Liberal, Gun Hater, Gay Activist, Enviromentalist, Pro-Choice, Any questions?" shirt on, can you say with a straight face that you wouldnt think they are an asshole and cocky about their beliefs? Thats ok though. You dont have an ego problem, so theres nothing to worry about huh? O:) O:). Oh to answer your previous statement about me being brain damaged, you technically got that 1 right (so the doctors speculate). Ritalin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSG_Standard Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 ...By the way' date=' just wondering, were those 3 Muslims ever given a trial to prove their guilt before "enhanced interrogating" (HA HA HA gotta love people calling dog crap roses huh?) them? Or are we now at the "guilt by creed, race and/or geographical location" part of our downward spiral?...[/quote'] Hey bol, We are all entitled to our opinion and that's cool and all...but these three Muslims that were waterboarded were some very BAD dudes...we didn't give them a trial, because we used techniques to track them, listen in on their conversations, spy on them and stuff, that is only legal when done outside the USA. Spys and the intelligence agencies don't play by the same rules overseas that they do in their home country...But you can rest assured that these 3 Muslims weren't captured, interrogated and treated roughly, just because they were Muslims or Arabs or any other race... One of these men was the "mastermind" behind 9/11 and gave up information that allowed our folks to stop other potential attacks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homz Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 Hey bol' date=' We are all entitled to our opinion and that's cool and all...but these three Muslims that were waterboarded were some very BAD dudes...we didn't give them a trial, because we used techniques to track them, listen in on their conversations, spy on them and stuff, that is only legal when done outside the USA. Spys and the intelligence agencies don't play by the same rules overseas that they do in their home country...But you can rest assured that these 3 Muslims weren't captured, interrogated and treated roughly, just because they were Muslims or Arabs or any other race... One of these men was the "mastermind" behind 9/11 and gave up information that allowed our folks to stop other potential attacks...[/quote'] And we know this because the Bush administration told us so. It must be true. They're so forthcoming with all the facts. I think what you might call a wise man once said, "Trust but verify". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.