If nothing else, can everyone here at least agree that removing some of the military's few Arabic speaking translators from the service during a time of multiple wars in the middle east because of their sexual orientation one of the worst ideas since invading Iraq?

 

 

There's more than a "few" Arabic linguist in the military.

 

Here's a thought: When joining the military, service members sign a contract in triplicate form that states "Don't ask, don't tell, don't pursue." Also, annual training on this subject is required. This means you aren't allowed to ask about someone's sexual preference, aren't allowed to promote your own homosexuality, and aren't allowed to perform homosexual acts. This allows for homosexuals in the military "legally" if one doesn't openly admit to homosexuality and doesn't perform homosexual acts, and in theory punishes those who actively try to "out" homosexuals.

If you can't work with people because of who they are, you should revisit your definition of grown up.

LMAO. Too bad y'all couldn't keep them uppity negroes out also. Shall we also have them stop paying taxes? I'm certain it must kill you to think they are contributing tax dollars to your salary. Nuke, being kept but a gay guy.

 

 

Even the "uppity negroes" find gays repulsive......much more so than I do. Personally if a dude is gay I could care less......just so long as I'm not forced to live with them, especially in close quarters for long periods of time as happens in combat.

 

There's more than a "few" Arabic linguist in the military.

 

Here's a thought: When joining the military, service members sign a contract in triplicate form that states "Don't ask, don't tell, don't pursue." Also, annual training on this subject is required. This means you aren't allowed to ask about someone's sexual preference, aren't allowed to promote your own homosexuality, and aren't allowed to perform homosexual acts. This allows for homosexuals in the military "legally" if one doesn't openly admit to homosexuality and doesn't perform homosexual acts, and in theory punishes those who actively try to "out" homosexuals.

 

 

Oh but you see living up to a contract you agree to when you sign up is too hard for some people.

 

LOL

I wonder if we could pass a "sugar daddy" clause... so that way gay people that are excluded from being able to serve can be excluded from having to pay for it.

 

The government spends nearly 500 billion dollars of its budget on defense. The total budget is about three trillion give or take a few billion.

 

So that would be about a 17% tax rebate I'd get, right?

 

This way everyone's happy. Gays get tax cuts. And Nuke won't have to worry about whether or not a queer is looking at him funny - since that's clearly his concern about the men and women he works with.

There's more than a "few" Arabic linguist in the military.

 

Here's a thought: When joining the military, service members sign a contract in triplicate form that states "Don't ask, don't tell, don't pursue." Also, annual training on this subject is required. This means you aren't allowed to ask about someone's sexual preference, aren't allowed to promote your own homosexuality, and aren't allowed to perform homosexual acts. This allows for homosexuals in the military "legally" if one doesn't openly admit to homosexuality and doesn't perform homosexual acts, and in theory punishes those who actively try to "out" homosexuals.

According to the GAO, 55 Arabic speaking linguists have been dismissed from the military, and some 800 total folks with key skills have been removed from the military due to this program. Discharging and replacing those 800 people has cost the government nearly $400 million. And the 9/11 commission report identified a lack of arabic speakers as a key problem facing the U.S. in its current war messes.

And Nuke won't have to worry about whether or not a queer is looking at him funny - since that's clearly his concern about the men and women he works with.

 

Or worse, learning the cute guy in the next bunk isn't attracted to him.

And the 9/11 commission report identified a lack of arabic speakers as a key problem facing the U.S. in its current war messes.

 

 

There's an easy step to ease some of the lack of linguist, have the Marines and Army stop using liguist as maintenance workers for trucks. Most linguist who go to tactical units don't use there language at all while serving with that unit. I would think this would be misusing funds. Why send someone to Monterey, CA for one to two years for learning a language to have them work on trucks?

This way everyone's happy. Gays get tax cuts. And Nuke won't have to worry about whether or not a queer is looking at him funny - since that's clearly his concern about the men and women he works with.

 

 

Thanks to the current laws that's not a concern of mine at all.

Oh really? Maybe it should be. After all you don't know.

I like how the military is so anti-gay, yet somebody had the gayest idea in the history of gaydom by stripping all of the male terrorist prisoners, lay them in a pile on top of each other, and then take pictures of it.

 

Must have been the idea of a homosexual

just so long as I'm not forced to live with them, especially in close quarters for long periods of time as happens in combat.

 

So how often does the guy have to be getting laid for you to be comfortable with him and not have it effect moral?

 

"Hey, Chuck, we noticed that you haven't laid a broad in months. It's weirding us out and really bad for moral. So here's $20 go hire that hooker in town so we all can breath a little easier."

 

Why does itr matter who he's having sex with?

I like how the military is so anti-gay, yet somebody had the gayest idea in the history of gaydom by stripping all of the male terrorist prisoners, lay them in a pile on top of each other, and then take pictures of it.

 

Must have been the idea of a homosexual

 

It was Thumbs Up Woman's idea.

And women shouldn't be allowed in either.

It was Thumbs Up Woman's idea.

And women shouldn't be allowed in either.

 

Ahh, no it wasn't Lynndie England's idea. The technique of humiliation was from higher up, complete with fun games like this to play.

"Hey, Chuck, we noticed that you haven't laid a broad in months. It's weirding us out and really bad for moral. So here's $20 go hire that hooker in town so we all can breath a little easier."

 

 

 

 

"Thanks, but I'm gonna need more than $20. I've got standards"

 

"Thanks, but I'm gonna need more than $20. I've got standards"

 

There you go again, making us all nervous,

There you go again, making us all nervous,

 

 

 

"What are you implying, my soon to be dead friend."

Edited January 16, 200719 yr by mr_genius

i'd guess that a majority of the 18-25 yr olds in the military today have grown up with openly gay people in their schools, health clubs, workplaces, sports teams, etc and would be more acceptable in serving side by side with an openly gay person.

 

how is an openly gay person any different than men serving next to a woman?

 

straight man wants to bang the woman

gay man wants to bang the straight man

You're assuming gay people are turned on by both gay and straight Males. I'm certainly not turned on to "butch" lesbians.

 

I also have a strong feeling that while serving in the military, gay males can control their sexual desires better than the straight male.

 

How many cases have there been of a gay man raping a straight man in the military?

How many cases have there been of a woman being raped or sexually assualted by a straight man or men in the military?

 

Thought so.

 

What's the military's stance on bisexuals?

Edited January 16, 200719 yr by santo=dorf

Ahh, no it wasn't Lynndie England's idea. The technique of humiliation was from higher up, complete with fun games like this to play.

 

Well, yeah. I was kidding. Spoilsport.

We do want grownups......just not homosexual ones.

Nuke, I want you to remember before I say this, that I have a lot of respect for your viewpoints on many topics, and I look forward to your journals from Iraq. That said...

 

Your views on this topic are so Unamerican and freedom-hating as to make me ill.

 

 

i'd guess that a majority of the 18-25 yr olds in the military today have grown up with openly gay people in their schools, health clubs, workplaces, sports teams, etc and would be more acceptable in serving side by side with an openly gay person.

 

how is an openly gay person any different than men serving next to a woman?

 

straight man wants to bang the woman

gay man wants to bang the straight man

There is no applying logic to hate and fear. Neither are logical thought processes.

In Nukes case, we have spent thousands of dollars to make him believe killing solves all problems and that you have to be a macho, broad banging, sob to be a soldier. The culture has been there forever. Perhaps it is necessary, but I doubt it.

In Nukes case, we have spent thousands of dollars to make him believe killing solves all problems and that you have to be a macho, broad banging, sob to be a soldier. The culture has been there forever. Perhaps it is necessary, but I doubt it.

I've heard that argument before with cops too, though to a lesser extent. Its BS in that case as well. If you can't put aside what the guy next to you does in his spare time and cover each other's asses when the s*** hits the fan, then you are just a little too easily distracted.

I've heard that argument before with cops too, though to a lesser extent. Its BS in that case as well. If you can't put aside what the guy next to you does in his spare time and cover each other's asses when the s*** hits the fan, then you are just a little too easily distracted.

Maybe they're just covering for something.

 

Obligatory.

I'm certainly not turned on to "butch" lesbians.

How about lipstick lesbians?

Your views on this topic are so Unamerican and freedom-hating as to make me ill.

 

 

 

I aim to please.