U.S. politics isolation tank

[JMohegan]

The southeast is to blame because a few dickheads live here?

Your "here" is different than Deep South "here."

As you no doubt know already, both of your fine, blue, Senators voted to repeal DADT. So MWY's shot misses the mark where you're concerned, no question.

But if you consider the rest of the South.... well, that's a different story. Fact is that the NO votes came from southern states + rural states + half of Indiana + fucking Arizona.

 

[Homburg]

Your "here" is different than Deep South "here."

As you no doubt know already, both of your fine, blue, Senators voted to repeal DADT. So MWY's shot misses the mark where you're concerned, no question.

But if you consider the rest of the South.... well, that's a different story. Fact is that the NO votes came from southern states + rural states + half of Indiana + fucking Arizona.

Now this I'm on board with. The Deep South is not the entirety of the south or the southeast, any more than Dade County Florida represents all of Florida or Austin represents all of Texas.

I'm pleased to say that I voted for both of my senators. And doubly pleased given Jim Webb's entirely unpopular support for prison reform and drug law reform. They are enormous, huge, bigger-than-that hot button issues for me, and he's on the ball generally speaking. At least more on the ball than the vast majority, and I'm glad to see it. I also liked Warner as governor. We've had a lot of good blue governors over the past twenty years that I've lived here.

 

[BiBunny]

We, the Intelligent People of the Deep South, do hereby apologize for the imbeciles who reside here and give our region a bad name. We are currently working on a plan to have them all deported to Antarctica, but we haven't quite worked out the logistics yet. Thank you for being patient with us while we work out the kinks in this program.

 

[WriterDom]

Your "here" is different than Deep South "here."

As you no doubt know already, both of your fine, blue, Senators voted to repeal DADT. So MWY's shot misses the mark where you're concerned, no question.

But if you consider the rest of the South.... well, that's a different story. Fact is that the NO votes came from southern states + rural states + half of Indiana + fucking Arizona.

Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, and North Carolina aren't Southern? I swear we need to make geography mandatory in high school.

Believe it or not, not everyone inside and outside the military think that repealing DADT is a good thing. And I'm sure deep down inside if you were to be honest, you'd admit to loathing the military and see this for what it is. Advancing the gay rights agenda.

And it wouldn't bother me if both my senators voted yes. Or no. Or ran and hid like the newly elected (D) from WV.

 

[intothewoods]

Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, and North Carolina aren't Southern? I swear we need to make geography mandatory in high school.

Believe it or not, not everyone inside and outside the military think that repealing DADT is a good thing. And I'm sure deep down inside if you were to be honest, you'd admit to loathing the military and see this for what it is. Advancing the gay rights agenda.

And it wouldn't bother me if both my senators voted yes. Or no. Or ran and hid like the newly elected (D) from WV.

If anything this seems like catching the army up. It's not like gay people are required to be closeted in the rest of the universe. But whatever, this just seems like a no brainer to me. The armed forces need to keep their numbers, not lose people.

 

[WriterDom]

If anything this seems like catching the army up. It's not like gay people are required to be closeted in the rest of the universe. But whatever, this just seems like a no brainer to me. The armed forces need to keep their numbers, not lose people.

So if allowing open gays would cause a net loss in recruitment and reenlistment you'd be against the policy?

 

[intothewoods]

So if allowing open gays would cause a net loss in recruitment and reenlistment you'd be against the policy?

Whether something works on a practical level is obviously a different question from right or wrong. Kind of like the use of torture. I think it's wrong, but the evidence suggests it also just doesn't work.

 

[Homburg]

Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, and North Carolina aren't Southern? I swear we need to make geography mandatory in high school.

Believe it or not, not everyone inside and outside the military think that repealing DADT is a good thing. And I'm sure deep down inside if you were to be honest, you'd admit to loathing the military and see this for what it is. Advancing the gay rights agenda.

And it wouldn't bother me if both my senators voted yes. Or no. Or ran and hid like the newly elected (D) from WV.

Yes, it is advancing the gay rights agenda? And? They're the last major demographic getting utterly shit on from a civil rights perspective. It's bad to hope for some legal parity?

And, no, not everyone thinks it is a good thing. And? As I've said before, I know a LOT of military. My informal polls indicate a whole lot of "don't give a shit", and that's ranging from Vietnam era to current service. Ask the same guys about non-americans serving in uniform as a path to citizenship and they're fine with it too. The uniform is the uniform, and if you are gutsy enough to put it on and maybe get shot for your trouble, that's enough, at least the ones I know.

The really funny thing is watching some former service gay friends of mine joke about it on facebook. One of them asked "Can you imagine a queen in basic?" and the whole lot started cracking jokes. I LOL'ed.

 

[WriterDom]

I don't have a problem with gays doing any job open to females. Combat units are a little different. There is no going home for them after the shift. If they really really really want to kill Muslims, then they can stay in the closet. And that's how over half of the combat guys feel.

That still leaves the vast number of jobs open and virtually all in the Air Force and Navy outside of the SEALS. And if a gay guy or girl can make it through SEAL training, then let them do it. I know I'd be ringing that bell the first day I imagine. Me and water have never gotten along well though.

G. I. Jane was bullshit though. They train those guys in the Pacific. Not in fucking Florida.

 

[JMohegan]

Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, and North Carolina aren't Southern?

No one said they weren't.

I don't have a problem with gays doing any job open to females. Combat units are a little different. There is no going home for them after the shift. If they really really really want to kill Muslims, then they can stay in the closet. And that's how over half of the combat guys feel.

If half the combat guys are bigoted idiots, tough shit for them. If they want to keep serving our country - the country that stands for equal rights for all people - then they'll just have to get over themselves, or go home and fuck themselves. Whichever.

DADT had it exactly backwards. We shouldn't have been kicking out the openly gay. We should have been kicking out the openly bigoted. No honor, no pension, fuck you.

 

[teknight]

@WD:
What makes women and gays unable to perform in combat?
Some of the toughest troops on the Eastern Front in the Russian army in WW2 were made up of women. They were vicious.
Even if you were to say that a woman isn't as strong physically as a man (and let's argue that's relevant in combat), how do you use that against gays?
Besides, an army that can't enforce enough discipline that dislike of one member in a team makes the ineffective, is not an army. It's a MOB. I thought the US armed forces had more ego and esprit de corps than that.

 

[WriterDom]

No one said they weren't.

Well you said "Fact is that the NO votes came from southern states" I guess that was a Bill Clinton "is?"


If half the combat guys are bigoted idiots, tough shit for them. If they want to keep serving our country - the country that stands for equal rights for all people - then they'll just have to get over themselves, or go home and fuck themselves. Whichever.

DADT had it exactly backwards. We shouldn't have been kicking out the openly gay. We should have been kicking out the openly bigoted. No honor, no pension, fuck you.

No, what we'll do is take a year or two to study this thing to figure out how to accommodate the 1% of the 5% gay population who might want to serve in the military.

 

[Netzach]

@WD:
What makes women and gays unable to perform in combat?
Some of the toughest troops on the Eastern Front in the Russian army in WW2 were made up of women. They were vicious.
Even if you were to say that a woman isn't as strong physically as a man (and let's argue that's relevant in combat), how do you use that against gays?
Besides, an army that can't enforce enough discipline that dislike of one member in a team makes the ineffective, is not an army. It's a MOB. I thought the US armed forces had more ego and esprit de corps than that.

And what happens when these guys (who pretty much don't exist, I think most combat troops are fine being saved by anyone as capable as they are) are assigned to assist an allied unit from Canada or Britain? Do they get to pucker their buttholes because a gay guy is scarier than a mortar and wahhh all the way home? Guess what - it's the MILITARY. It requires doing a whole bunch of UNSAVORY SHIT YOU DON'T WANT TO DO FOR THE COMMON GOOD. GET OVER IT.

I don't think I want a pussy like that in defense of me. If people different from you are more terrifying on your side than on their side there's something lacking in discipline and in being able to keep the important things in sight.

 

[Netzach]

No, what we'll do is take a year or two to study this thing to figure out how to accommodate the 1% of the 5% gay population who might want to serve in the military.

No, we should really worry more about the 1% of the 5% of the straight population who can't follow orders all of a sudden or give a fuck where the other guy's dick has been when defusing mines with him.

 

[teknight]

And what happens when these guys (who pretty much don't exist, I think most combat troops are fine being saved by anyone as capable as they are) are assigned to assist an allied unit from Canada or Britain? Do they get to pucker their buttholes because a gay guy is scarier than a mortar and wahhh all the way home?

I don't think I want a pussy like that in defense of me.

Bwahahahahahahhahaa.

Where's the like button when you need it?

 

[teknight]

No, what we'll do is take a year or two to study this thing to figure out how to accommodate the 1% of the 5% gay population who might want to serve in the military.

What accommodations are there to be made? It's the military- not a pleasure cruise to a whore house. You're not in the Army to fuck- not the same gender, not another gender, not anything else.

What's more ,all that phallic imagery is not supposed to give you a hard on. If it does, then, well, you might be gay, but, guess what? IT DOESN"T MATTER.

 

[WriterDom]

@WD:
What makes women and gays unable to perform in combat?
Some of the toughest troops on the Eastern Front in the Russian army in WW2 were made up of women. They were vicious.
Even if you were to say that a woman isn't as strong physically as a man (and let's argue that's relevant in combat), how do you use that against gays?
Besides, an army that can't enforce enough discipline that dislike of one member in a team makes the ineffective, is not an army. It's a MOB. I thought the US armed forces had more ego and esprit de corps than that.

Damn, I know dude! The Russians were just getting ready to deploy the vicious women units in Afghanistan but at the very last minute held back because even their godless hearts didn't want to see what would happen to the Afghans once that happened. They decided instead to withdraw to save the Afghan race from extinction.

 

[teknight]

Damn, I know dude! The Russians were just getting ready to deploy the vicious women units in Afghanistan but at the very last minute held back because even their godless hearts didn't want to see what would happen to the Afghans once that happened. They decided instead to withdraw to save the Afghan race from extinction.

Be as sarcastic as you want. You still can't support your bigotry with valid arguments.

 

[Netzach]

Damn, I know dude! The Russians were just getting ready to deploy the vicious women units in Afghanistan but at the very last minute held back because even their godless hearts didn't want to see what would happen to the Afghans once that happened. They decided instead to withdraw to save the Afghan race from extinction.

If you think the Night Witches were a pussy Blue Angel air show you should read something sometime.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/46th_Taman_Guards_Night_Bomber_Aviation_Regiment

 

[teknight]

Who were the Air Witches? I've never heard of them.

 

[Netzach]

Who were the Air Witches? I've never heard of them.

Night Witches, my bad. We had Rosie, the Russians had Raskova.

 

[teknight]

Night Witches, my bad. We had Rosie, the Russians had Raskova.

Spasibo!


ETA: Raskova would kick Rosie's ass...or at least bomb it back to the Stone Age.

 

[Netzach]

Spasibo!


ETA: Raskova would kick Rosie's ass...or at least bomb it back to the Stone Age.

Yeah. Seriously, the rural women out here have been expected to pick rocks, birth cows, and drive tractor just as much. Now it's get shot at but you can't be recognized for shooting back as much as if you had a penis.
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2010/07/military_female_vets_071310w/

 

[Homburg]

I don't have a problem with gays doing any job open to females. Combat units are a little different. There is no going home for them after the shift. If they really really really want to kill Muslims, then they can stay in the closet. And that's how over half of the combat guys feel.

There's no going home after the shift for any of the ones that are deployed. "Base" isn't home. It's only mildly safer than the combat zone.

As to combat troops, hmm, well, I can tick off a navy close-support drone pilot that was deployed with the SEALs and has the bullet wound scars to prove it, six marines (two active currently), one combat engineer, a former 60 gunner, a few MP's/SP's, an army ranger, and a coupla infantrymen all current or recent service that I am either friends with, or know well, and all are or were front-line combat troops. Not a one of them gives a shit at worst, and most are actively for the repeal of DADT. Geeze, guess I know guys from the half that doesn't care. Weird.

And that's not getting into the old farts that I know, such as 82nd airborne, combat pilots, rescue pilots, infantry, combat medics, etc. Sure, it's all anecdotal, but, fuck, I think it's a bit weird that I can tally out probably 40 names of folks I personally know that have been, or are, in uniform, and not a one has ever expressed a negative opinion about it. Sure, it can be said that the folks that I tend to surround myself with are selected in part for their views, but I'm also talking co-workers, business associates, etc. In other words, folks that I don't select.

Oh, the guy what deployed with the SEALs - one of the guys on the fireteam he was with was gay and didn't hide it. Nobody on the teams gave a shit.

That still leaves the vast number of jobs open and virtually all in the Air Force and Navy outside of the SEALS. And if a gay guy or girl can make it through SEAL training, then let them do it. I know I'd be ringing that bell the first day I imagine. Me and water have never gotten along well though.

G. I. Jane was bullshit though. They train those guys in the Pacific. Not in fucking Florida.

Shit, I'd ring the bell after about ten minutes.

Where I have a problem with women in combat roles is over physical requirements. Let's ignore the military for a moment, and look at something less charged - firefighters. A friend of mine went through fire school locally and was telling me that the women had less stringent physical requirements than the men. This boggled me. A fire is not going to be nice to a woman because she is female. And I am not going to be lighter is I pass out from smoke and need to be carried out. If the standard for a man is a ladder carry with a 185# dummy, it should be the same for a woman.

The same concept goes for combat. Your battle buddy is not going to be lighter to carry out of harm's way if he gets wounded. I have no problems whatsoever with women in combat teams so long as they have the same basic physical requirements as the men. And I in no way consider this a de facto ban on women in combat units. I know more than a few buff chicks that could outperform me all day long, and more than a few that I would gladly have at my back if things got ugly. I just don't think that physical requirements should be less.

The bottom line for me is that combat is combat regardless of gender. The requirements of the job should determine the qualifications of the person performing said job. And, really, it is not a matter of raising the bar to unrealistic levels for women. It is a matter of just setting the bar, and allowing those who wish to go there to train for it. Run times, push-ups, sit-ups etc are all entirely possible for a motivated woman to train for.

--

What accommodations are there to be made? It's the military- not a pleasure cruise to a whore house. You're not in the Army to fuck- not the same gender, not another gender, not anything else.

What's more ,all that phallic imagery is not supposed to give you a hard on. If it does, then, well, you might be gay, but, guess what? IT DOESN"T MATTER.

This. Fuck yes.

 

[teknight]

Yeah. Seriously, the rural women out here have been expected to pick rocks, birth cows, and drive tractor just as much. Now it's get shot at but you can't be recognized for shooting back as much as if you had a penis.

Uhh...out here? Are you in Rossiya, cheloveka?