- Joined
- Jun 23, 2009
- Messages
- 133,631
- Reaction score
- 30,937
- Location
- Bagdad, La.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
I,ll take the Commandants word for it.
<I, and the Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps [Carlton Kent], will personally lead this effort, thus ensuring the respect and dignity due all Marines,” Amos said. “On this matter, we look forward to further demonstrating to the American people the discipline and loyalty that have been the hallmark of the United States Marine Corps for over 235 years.>
Top Marine pledges to
True and so far, there are no rules saying that he can't make whatever billetting policy he deems fit for his service.
But the answer is no. Secretary Gates actually put this to rest earlier this month, saying that no separate facilities will be built to separate gay and straight service members. Military officials say doing so would create divisions and, quote, "inappropriately isolate a portion of the force."
Does the Commandant state, anywhere in that source, that he doesn't intend on making barracks arrangments, based on sexual orientation? His idea of the best way to integrate gays into the Marine corps, may be to segregate living quarters.
No but like any other loyal Marine he did say this.
<"Fidelity is the essence of the United States Marine Corps. Above all else, we are loyal to the Constitution, our Commander in Chief, Congress, our Chain of Command, and the American people>
So I take him for his word that the top Marine will treat all of his troops like what they are MARINES. They will have to perform just like they did last week, last year, or ten years ago, LIKE MARINES.
Which means they will be sleeping besides OTHER MARINES wherever they are stationed. Be it 11 area at Camp Pendleton, or shaking scorpions out of their boots at the Stumps.
Except for the Secretary of Defense saying it's not going to happen.
No but like any other loyal Marine he did say this.
<"Fidelity is the essence of the United States Marine Corps. Above all else, we are loyal to the Constitution, our Commander in Chief, Congress, our Chain of Command, and the American people>
So I take him for his word that the top Marine will treat all of his troops like what they are MARINES. They will have to perform just like they did last week, last year, or ten years ago, LIKE MARINES.
Which means they will be sleeping besides OTHER MARINES wherever they are stationed. Be it 11 area at Camp Pendleton, or shaking scorpions out of their boots at the Stumps.
Exactly. They were professionals last month, they'll be professionals next month. Those who can't wont last very long, or so says every marine that I know. As a buddy of mine put it "Deuce, a couple months ago a bullet came across my face so close that it actually tore a little piece off my ear. Half inch the other way and it would have gone in my eye. I got other ****in things to worry about."
Female Marines aren't treated like Marines? They're made to live in seperate quarters.
Female Marines aren't treated like Marines? They're made to live in seperate quarters.
Hello goalpost....You in the wrong spot, let me move you back a few feet.:lamo
Which brings forth an interesting question for ya apdst. How is the cohesion between the guys and the gals since you have stated that it hurts cohesion by having troops live seperately. Or did I misunderstand you?
Fire for efffect: are you saying that females don't live in seperate billets?
Obviously, it's not good enough, hence part of the reason that combat arms units aren't co-ed.
I’ll see ya … buddy, I think I will see if I can find someone with a couple of active braincells that wants to debate honestly.:2wave:
I'm sure you rushed your butt out to enlist, this morning. Didn't you?
Wait...I thought the reason women weren't allowed in combat arms units was because...well they are women? You know, not able to lift as much, guys tendency to try and protect the women which diverts his attention from what he's suppose to be doing...that kind of stuff. At least that's what I've been told by members of the military anyways. Are you saying that they're wrong and the reason is that they are not housed together?
Does my enlisting or not somehow affect the professionalism of the marines?
What are you going to say when most of the soldiers that don't want to sleep next to the, "queer faggot", are, "homophobe niggers"? Are you saying that the military would be better off with fewer black soldiers?
Nevermind that silly arguement; gay and straight soldiers aren't going to be forced to share billets. It just ain't gonna happen. If the 80-90% of our service get out and there is a draft, that won't be good for our military.
Yeah and most people who don't have a clue how the system works, believe that, too. In actuality, there are several reasons that combat arms units aren't co-ed. The least of which is ability. There are women out there that would make great infantrymen. However, they're still females, who have bleeding cracks every month, which makes hygene an issue. The natural instinct of men to protect women won't go away. The IDF has proven that when female soldiers are hit on the battlefield, the male soldiers will fall out of the attack, to attend to that wounded female, thereby weakening the assault force; which is why the IDF banned females from combat arms units for a number of years. There's the ever present sexual harassment issues, plus the fact that a male and female soldier, sharing a fighting position would be a definite distraction to both soldiers, possibly causing them to take their mind off their primary mission.
No, it's not about ability. I've known females, both in and out of the service that would make fine infantry soldiers, which is why I've thought for some time that the U.S. Army and Marine Corps should field all female units, to include all female combat arms units (infantry, armor, cavalry and artillery), just like the Soviets did during WW2--female soldiers, female NCO's and female officers. That would solve the unit cohesion problem, because then, members of an entire unit would be able to be housed together, accordingly.
We've argued this over and over before, although thinking 80-90% of the military is going to get out is complete fantasy and you have nothing to back up those numbers.
We've argued this over and over before, although thinking 80-90% of the military is going to get out is complete fantasy and you have nothing to back up those numbers. Anyway, I'm curious as to what you expect to see happen in the next year or two. You are convinced the military will fail or at least suffer in a great way, how will you measure that effect? A year or two from now, how will you measure the effect you are sure will happen.
In fact, how do you measure anything you say? I'm saying this now because I'm certain you are going claim you were right all along, and probably post some sob story from a Soldier who got out the military in disgrace for something related to fellow Soldiers, who happen to be homosexual. However I believe you have no way what-so-ever to measure the effects you are talking about, the 80-90% of the military quitting speculation shows that.
I never said anything of the sort.
Just as a point of definition, women are not banned from Combat Arms branches. They are banned from the Infantry and Armor branches, they are allowed to serve in Field Artillery, Aviation, and Air Defense Artillery
Ok so tell me what you think is going to happen in the next year or two as DADT is removed. How will you show, in a measureable way, that the US military will be weaker.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?