| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"J Young" |
| Date: |
12 Mar 2005 09:35:56 PM |
| Object: |
Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
A perfect compromise to this issue would be the creation of all gay
units. Gays could serve their country freely and openly and America
could benefit from the skills these soldiers could offer.
http://news.newkerala.com/world-news/?action=fullnews&id=79562
Bill submitted to allow gays in military:
Fifty-two Democrats and a single Republican Wednesday sponsored a
bill that would allow homosexuals to serve openly in the military, and
give those who left under the policy banning gays a chance to rejoin
the armed forces.
.
|
|
| User: "Omega" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
16 Mar 2005 09:58:40 PM |
|
|
: > : Maybe you can try to answer a question I posed on a different thread.
: > : Who would you prefer to have in your unit - a highly professional gay
: > : soldier, whose sexual orientation you know but who keeps his sex life
: > : as his own business, or a straight draftee who would really rather be
: > : doing something else and is a bit miffed that he got inducted at the
: > : start of the surfing season? Or you could opt for having nobody
: > : available, but that has its own problems. Those are basically your
: > : choices - they aren't getting enough people and with the deficit,
: > : they'll have some real trouble being able to raise the pay to
: > : attract more people.
: >
: > We do not have draftees, which are at best amateurs.
:
: You do not *currently* have draftees. There is, however, a shortfall -
: not enough people enlisting. If it gets bad enough, they'll start
: drafting people - they'll have no choice.
There are a number of reasons why will not have a draft:
1) the military does not want it
2) we are so short of forts and bases, most of which were cut during the
1990s, that it takes six to 12 months to get a new enlistee into Basic
Training.
3) It would take over two years to get the draft up and going. And we would
have to take every high school senior for testing to see if they were even
qualifed to be drafted. Over 50% of high school grads can not pass the
ASVAB (even the smart ones as they tend to be too narrowly educated). Over
60% have health issues such being overweight (grossly), asthma, mental
illness (too many fathered by men over 50) or even ADDL. Then all would
have to be fingerprinted and have DNA samples to be ran by the FBI. Too
many kids have criminal histories. And remember that all of this is public
data that can be shared with employers and universities. Plus how many
schools want it known how poor quality a student that they turn out? At
best, we would screen everyone just so that we could get about 5% of them
into the military.
4) during the Vietnam war we had an Army of 1.6 million soldiers, as has
been pointed out. That was one out of three males (11 million out of 27
million who turned 18 between 1959 and 1973). Now we have a total military
of only 1.5 million plus 1 million reservists. Do you think that we have
that great a short fall?
Thus I think that we will not be seeing a draft any time soon...
: > And those homosexuals who do get put out tend to make a big deal out of
: > their sexuality.
:
: You mean someone inadvertently blurts out the name of the person who
: he went on a date with? Or do you mean that they reach the point
: where they can't keep it under cover any longer? How do you think
: straight soldiers would react if they were told that they could never,
: ever say one word about their attraction to women or even let on that
: they might be attracted to women, and could above all never mention
: their girlfriends' names or even call them girlfriends?
:
They are often told to shut up. I do not want to hear your personal life.
I had one sergeant that was going on and on over his divorce. Finally I had
to take him aside and remind that it was extremely personal and he was
making everyone uncomfortable. It is called being professional. You
separate your personal life from your duty.
if you have issues, you take it up privately with your leaders. Every
leader from the lowest sergeant right thru general officers have been
trained in counseling. What they can not handle, and they are taught when
to recognize that, they forward to those who can: health professionals,
chaplains, financial personnel, and such. Yes we are have to counsel our
troops in every aspect of the human condition including sex, finances,
proper behavior....
.
|
|
|
| User: "No One" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
16 Mar 2005 10:50:03 PM |
|
|
"Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> writes:
: > : Maybe you can try to answer a question I posed on a different thread.
: > : Who would you prefer to have in your unit - a highly professional gay
: > : soldier, whose sexual orientation you know but who keeps his sex life
: > : as his own business, or a straight draftee who would really rather be
: > : doing something else and is a bit miffed that he got inducted at the
: > : start of the surfing season? Or you could opt for having nobody
: > : available, but that has its own problems. Those are basically your
: > : choices - they aren't getting enough people and with the deficit,
: > : they'll have some real trouble being able to raise the pay to
: > : attract more people.
: >
: > We do not have draftees, which are at best amateurs.
:
: You do not *currently* have draftees. There is, however, a shortfall -
: not enough people enlisting. If it gets bad enough, they'll start
: drafting people - they'll have no choice.
There are a number of reasons why will not have a draft:
1) the military does not want it
At some point, the military will prefer doing something to not having
enough people, so it is a valid question.
2) we are so short of forts and bases, most of which were cut during the
1990s, that it takes six to 12 months to get a new enlistee into Basic
Training.
The shortfall isn't so high that you'll have to double capacity.
3) It would take over two years to get the draft up and going.
Oh, that one's lame - how long do yo think it took during WW-II?
4) during the Vietnam war we had an Army of 1.6 million soldiers, as has
been pointed out. That was one out of three males (11 million out of 27
million who turned 18 between 1959 and 1973). Now we have a total military
of only 1.5 million plus 1 million reservists. Do you think that we have
that great a short fall?
A shortfall's been reported in the press. Eventually push will come
to shove.
: > And those homosexuals who do get put out tend to make a big deal out of
: > their sexuality.
: You mean someone inadvertently blurts out the name of the person who
: he went on a date with? Or do you mean that they reach the point
: where they can't keep it under cover any longer? How do you think
: straight soldiers would react if they were told that they could never,
: ever say one word about their attraction to women or even let on that
: they might be attracted to women, and could above all never mention
: their girlfriends' names or even call them girlfriends?
They are often told to shut up. I do not want to hear your personal
life. I had one sergeant that was going on and on over his divorce.
Finally I had to take him aside and remind that it was extremely
personal and he was making everyone uncomfortable. It is called
being professional. You separate your personal life from your duty.
Would a straight soldier be discharged for saying he had a girlfriend
or that he was married, or that he was engaged, or that they were
going to have a baby, or that he and his wife were adopting a child?
That's what we are talking about, not the nitty-gritty details of
one's personal life - just simply declarative statements of the sort
that would be appropriate for straight soldiers to make, and not
any different than co-workers might bring up in a casual conversation
in a business environment.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sanders Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
17 Mar 2005 12:31:47 AM |
|
|
"No One" <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:m3k6o6j2uk.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net...
"Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> writes:
At some point, the military will prefer doing something to not having
enough people, so it is a valid question.
They've already started relaxing the rules.
Now, if a recruit fails a drug test, he just has to promise he won't do it
while in the service.
Also, Class A misdemeanors are not disqualifiers.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
17 Mar 2005 12:56:33 AM |
|
|
Sanders Kaufman wrote:
"No One" <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:m3k6o6j2uk.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net...
"Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> writes:
At some point, the military will prefer doing something to not
having
enough people, so it is a valid question.
They've already started relaxing the rules.
Now, if a recruit fails a drug test, he just has to promise he won't
do it
while in the service.
Also, Class A misdemeanors are not disqualifiers.
Sanders, just remember in your discussions that there is currently
a WAR going on, there wasn't one in 85, not that I recall. ALL
UCMJ articles have probably been revised because of it. That's
why you don't see me trying to quote the regs, cause it was in
a totally different attitude, and posture of military conduct or
code.
You may be right in what -you- say, but I wouldn't begin to
presume to actually know about what's happening NOW, only
what was before.
bd4u
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sanders Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
17 Mar 2005 01:38:16 PM |
|
|
<gigo448@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1111042592.991242.313710@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Sanders Kaufman wrote:
They've already started relaxing the rules.
Now, if a recruit fails a drug test, he just has to promise he won't
do it
while in the service.
Also, Class A misdemeanors are not disqualifiers.
Sanders, just remember in your discussions that there is currently
a WAR going on, there wasn't one in 85, not that I recall. ALL
I never read any delcaration of war.
Got a link to it?
What we have here is called a "police action" or a "terrorist attack" - take
your pick.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
18 Mar 2005 09:38:30 AM |
|
|
Sanders Kaufman wrote:
<gigo448@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1111042592.991242.313710@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Sanders Kaufman wrote:
They've already started relaxing the rules.
Now, if a recruit fails a drug test, he just has to promise he
won't
do it
while in the service.
Also, Class A misdemeanors are not disqualifiers.
Sanders, just remember in your discussions that there is currently
a WAR going on, there wasn't one in 85, not that I recall. ALL
I never read any delcaration of war.
Hmmm, neither did I come to think of it.
Got a link to it?
What we have here is called a "police action" or a "terrorist attack"
- take
your pick.
This is getting as bad as Nam, isn't it. How many years have we been
fightin
terrorism now? And STILL two more Nations to either bully or cow down
to.
I betcha I know which one we will cow down to, it don't take no genuis
to know which one is blackmailing US with Nukes, and which one US are
saving for last Cause Bush is either too scared to confront them, or
has MOON's assurance that Moon can pull something out of his bag
of tricks. Can US trust a North Korean Nationalist like Sun Myung
Moon? Should president Bush?
Damned if I know, and only the future will tell us the truth.
bd4u
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Omega" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
17 Mar 2005 10:22:44 PM |
|
|
: > > At some point, the military will prefer doing something to not
: having enough people, so it is a valid question.
: >
: > They've already started relaxing the rules.
: > Now, if a recruit fails a drug test, he just has to promise he won't
: do it
: > while in the service.
: > Also, Class A misdemeanors are not disqualifiers.
:
: Sanders, just remember in your discussions that there is currently
: a WAR going on, there wasn't one in 85, not that I recall. ALL
: UCMJ articles have probably been revised because of it. That's
: why you don't see me trying to quote the regs, cause it was in
: a totally different attitude, and posture of military conduct or
: code.
:
: You may be right in what -you- say, but I wouldn't begin to
: presume to actually know about what's happening NOW, only
: what was before.
:
: bd4u
You are correct, this is not Vietnam. We do not a bunch of amateurs, that
is draftees, but rather professional soldiers. Thus we do not have soldiers
who are more focused on getting laid by whores, getting drunk or doing drugs
as was so common in Vietnam.
Nor do we deploy as individuals but rather as units (which is one of the two
reasons for the Stop-Loss so as a unit is full 90 day before deploying, and
90 days after deploying so that the troops can decompress as a group).
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sanders Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
17 Mar 2005 10:51:22 PM |
|
|
"Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> wrote in message
news:oIs_d.145992$4q6.132143@attbi_s01...
: You may be right in what -you- say, but I wouldn't begin to
: presume to actually know about what's happening NOW, only
: what was before.
You are correct, this is not Vietnam. We do not a bunch of amateurs, that
is draftees, but rather professional soldiers. Thus we do not have
soldiers
who are more focused on getting laid by whores, getting drunk or doing
drugs
as was so common in Vietnam.
Draftee, involuntary extension - not too big a difference.
The US is *still* forcing kids to fight against their will.
And instead of screwin whores, they rape prisoners.
And instead of doing drugs, they torture prisoners.
And instead of getting drunk, they murder prisoners.
Nor do we deploy as individuals but rather as units (which is one of the
two
reasons for the Stop-Loss so as a unit is full 90 day before deploying,
and
90 days after deploying so that the troops can decompress as a group).
Stop Loss - NeoCon codword for "slavery".
.
|
|
|
| User: "Omega" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
18 Mar 2005 06:00:16 AM |
|
|
"Sanders Kaufman" <usenet@kaufman.net> wrote in message
news:e7t_d.22360$yp.14380@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
: "Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> wrote in message
: news:oIs_d.145992$4q6.132143@attbi_s01...
:
:
: > : You may be right in what -you- say, but I wouldn't begin to
: > : presume to actually know about what's happening NOW, only
: > : what was before.
:
: > You are correct, this is not Vietnam. We do not a bunch of amateurs,
that
: > is draftees, but rather professional soldiers. Thus we do not have
: > soldiers who are more focused on getting laid by whores, getting drunk
or doing
: > drugs as was so common in Vietnam.
:
: Draftee, involuntary extension - not too big a difference.
: The US is *still* forcing kids to fight against their will.
In most cases, it is merely a matter of months. In some cases, just weeks.
But you go as an unit, you return as an unit. You decompress as a group.
For one thing, it is good mental health practice. That is what we did in
WW2.
: And instead of screwin whores, they rape prisoners.
: And instead of doing drugs, they torture prisoners.
: And instead of getting drunk, they murder prisoners.
A rather extremist view....
: > Nor do we deploy as individuals but rather as units (which is one of the
: > two reasons for the Stop-Loss so as a unit is full 90 day before
deploying,
: > and 90 days after deploying so that the troops can decompress as a
group).
:
: Stop Loss - NeoCon codword for "slavery".
No, just being a lot smarter than we were in Vietnam.
But then these soldiers and Marines are some of the best warriors that this
world has ever seen.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mitchell Holman" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
18 Mar 2005 07:26:12 AM |
|
|
"Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> wrote in
news:jpz_d.147761$4q6.115563@attbi_s01:
"Sanders Kaufman" <usenet@kaufman.net> wrote in message
news:e7t_d.22360$yp.14380@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
: "Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> wrote in message
: news:oIs_d.145992$4q6.132143@attbi_s01...
:
:
: > : You may be right in what -you- say, but I wouldn't begin to
: > : presume to actually know about what's happening NOW, only
: > : what was before.
:
: > You are correct, this is not Vietnam. We do not a bunch of amateurs,
that
: > is draftees, but rather professional soldiers. Thus we do not have
: > soldiers who are more focused on getting laid by whores, getting
: > drunk
or doing
: > drugs as was so common in Vietnam.
:
: Draftee, involuntary extension - not too big a difference.
: The US is *still* forcing kids to fight against their will.
In most cases, it is merely a matter of months. In some cases, just
weeks. But you go as an unit, you return as an unit. You decompress as
a group. For one thing, it is good mental health practice. That is what
we did in WW2.
: And instead of screwin whores, they rape prisoners.
: And instead of doing drugs, they torture prisoners.
: And instead of getting drunk, they murder prisoners.
A rather extremist view....
: > Nor do we deploy as individuals but rather as units (which is one of
: > the two reasons for the Stop-Loss so as a unit is full 90 day before
deploying,
: > and 90 days after deploying so that the troops can decompress as a
group).
:
: Stop Loss - NeoCon codword for "slavery".
No, just being a lot smarter than we were in Vietnam.
But then these soldiers and Marines are some of the best warriors that
this world has ever seen.
That explains why the president of the US has
to go on arab TV networks and apologize for the
behavior of our "professional" soldiers. Right.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Omega" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
19 Mar 2005 02:41:50 PM |
|
|
: >: > : You may be right in what -you- say, but I wouldn't begin to
: >: > : presume to actually know about what's happening NOW, only
: >: > : what was before.
: >:
: >: > You are correct, this is not Vietnam. We do not a bunch of amateurs,
: > that is draftees, but rather professional soldiers. Thus we do not have
: >: > soldiers who are more focused on getting laid by whores, getting
: >: > drunk or doing drugs as was so common in Vietnam.
: >:
: >: Draftee, involuntary extension - not too big a difference.
: >: The US is *still* forcing kids to fight against their will.
: >
: > In most cases, it is merely a matter of months. In some cases, just
: > weeks. But you go as an unit, you return as an unit. You decompress as
: > a group. For one thing, it is good mental health practice. That is what
: > we did in WW2.
: >
: >: And instead of screwin whores, they rape prisoners.
: >: And instead of doing drugs, they torture prisoners.
: >: And instead of getting drunk, they murder prisoners.
: >
: > A rather extremist view....
: >
: >: > Nor do we deploy as individuals but rather as units (which is one of
: >: > the two reasons for the Stop-Loss so as a unit is full 90 day before
: > deploying, and 90 days after deploying so that the troops can decompress
as a
: > group).
: >:
: >: Stop Loss - NeoCon codword for "slavery".
: >
: > No, just being a lot smarter than we were in Vietnam.
: > But then these soldiers and Marines are some of the best warriors that
: > this world has ever seen.
:
:
: That explains why the president of the US has
: to go on arab TV networks and apologize for the
: behavior of our "professional" soldiers. Right.
Want to see how the Chinese Army deals with prisoners?
and you can not compare anything in Europe as every country there has a
military smaller than the Texas National Guard.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sanders Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
18 Mar 2005 02:34:15 PM |
|
|
"Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> wrote in message
news:jpz_d.147761$4q6.115563@attbi_s01...
"Sanders Kaufman" <usenet@kaufman.net> wrote in message
But then these soldiers and Marines are some of the best warriors that
this
world has ever seen.
By what metric - or is that a faith-based assertion?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Omega" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
19 Mar 2005 02:43:05 PM |
|
|
"Sanders Kaufman" <usenet@kaufman.net> wrote in message
news:bXG_d.23956$YD4.8362@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...
: "Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> wrote in message
: news:jpz_d.147761$4q6.115563@attbi_s01...
: > "Sanders Kaufman" <usenet@kaufman.net> wrote in message
:
:
: > But then these soldiers and Marines are some of the best warriors that
: > this world has ever seen.
:
: By what metric - or is that a faith-based assertion?
Training, education, intelligence level, physical conditioning, self
discipline and character. The last military that was even close was the
Roman Army.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Susan Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
20 Mar 2005 02:22:44 AM |
|
|
"Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> wrote in message
news:s90%d.3274$b37.2067@attbi_s02...
"Sanders Kaufman" <usenet@kaufman.net> wrote in message
news:bXG_d.23956$YD4.8362@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...
: "Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> wrote in message
: news:jpz_d.147761$4q6.115563@attbi_s01...
: > "Sanders Kaufman" <usenet@kaufman.net> wrote in message
:
:
: > But then these soldiers and Marines are some of the best warriors that
: > this world has ever seen.
:
: By what metric - or is that a faith-based assertion?
Training, education, intelligence level, physical conditioning, self
discipline and character. The last military that was even close was the
Roman Army.
Except that even our professional soldiers say that they wouldn't have to go
up against the Israelis.
I just thank G-d that Americans don't *have* to be as good as the Israelis,
even if we are :-)
Susan
.
|
|
|
| User: "Omega" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
20 Mar 2005 10:29:01 AM |
|
|
"Susan Cohen" <flavia13@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:opa%d.9755$GI6.1826@trnddc05...
:
: "Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> wrote in message
: news:s90%d.3274$b37.2067@attbi_s02...
: >
: > "Sanders Kaufman" <usenet@kaufman.net> wrote in message
: > news:bXG_d.23956$YD4.8362@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...
: > : "Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> wrote in message
: > : news:jpz_d.147761$4q6.115563@attbi_s01...
: > : > "Sanders Kaufman" <usenet@kaufman.net> wrote in message
: > :
: > :
: > : > But then these soldiers and Marines are some of the best warriors
that
: > : > this world has ever seen.
: > :
: > : By what metric - or is that a faith-based assertion?
: >
: > Training, education, intelligence level, physical conditioning, self
: > discipline and character. The last military that was even close was the
: > Roman Army.
:
: Except that even our professional soldiers say that they wouldn't have to
go
: up against the Israelis.
: I just thank G-d that Americans don't *have* to be as good as the
Israelis,
: even if we are :-)
:
: Susan
Some of the Israeli army are very good. Especially their intelligence
community. The Turks are as tough as they come. But neither have such a
large and broad trained military as we do. Nor an Army of highly educated
professionals as we have.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Riain Barton/ריעין ברתון" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
20 Mar 2005 01:34:09 PM |
|
|
RUBBISH, you know very little about the IDF!!!
"Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> wrote in message
news:hxh%d.87740$r55.40571@attbi_s52...
:
: "Susan Cohen" <flavia13@verizon.net> wrote in message
: news:opa%d.9755$GI6.1826@trnddc05...
::
:: "Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> wrote in message
:: news:s90%d.3274$b37.2067@attbi_s02...
:: >
:: > "Sanders Kaufman" <usenet@kaufman.net> wrote in message
:: > news:bXG_d.23956$YD4.8362@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...
:: > : "Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> wrote in message
:: > : news:jpz_d.147761$4q6.115563@attbi_s01...
:: > : > "Sanders Kaufman" <usenet@kaufman.net> wrote in message
:: > :
:: > :
:: > : > But then these soldiers and Marines are some of the best
warriors
: that
:: > : > this world has ever seen.
:: > :
:: > : By what metric - or is that a faith-based assertion?
:: >
:: > Training, education, intelligence level, physical conditioning,
self
:: > discipline and character. The last military that was even close was
the
:: > Roman Army.
::
:: Except that even our professional soldiers say that they wouldn't
have to
: go
:: up against the Israelis.
:: I just thank G-d that Americans don't *have* to be as good as the
: Israelis,
:: even if we are :-)
::
:: Susan
:
: Some of the Israeli army are very good. Especially their intelligence
: community. The Turks are as tough as they come. But neither have
such a
: large and broad trained military as we do. Nor an Army of highly
educated
: professionals as we have.
:
:
.
|
|
|
| User: "Omega" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
20 Mar 2005 03:47:08 PM |
|
|
"Riain Barton/ריעין ברתון" <riain@zion.org.il> wrote in message
news:76k%d.41594$Q83.20573@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
: RUBBISH, you know very little about the IDF!!!
:
:
:
You may have served with them, I doubt, given your over emotional and
illogical attitudes, that you ever understood them. But then what private
understands anything?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Riain Barton/ריעין ברתון" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
20 Mar 2005 07:57:45 PM |
|
|
***** you ignorant Jew-Hating *****.
"Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> wrote in message
news:wbm%d.90137$Ze3.50499@attbi_s51...
:
: "Riain Barton/ריעין ברתון" <riain@zion.org.il> wrote in message
: news:76k%d.41594$Q83.20573@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
:: RUBBISH, you know very little about the IDF!!!
::
::
::
: You may have served with them, I doubt, given your over emotional and
: illogical attitudes, that you ever understood them. But then what
private
: understands anything?
:
:
.
|
|
|
| User: "Omega" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
20 Mar 2005 08:04:06 PM |
|
|
"Riain Barton/ריעין ברתון" <riain@zion.org.il> wrote in message
news:hMp%d.60417$%Y4.19236@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
: ***** you ignorant Jew-Hating *****.
It seems that you hate yourself. And BTW I am as Jewish as you are. Most
likely more so.
: "Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> wrote in message
: news:wbm%d.90137$Ze3.50499@attbi_s51...
::
:: "Riain Barton/ריעין ברתון" <riain@zion.org.il> wrote in message
:: news:76k%d.41594$Q83.20573@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
::: RUBBISH, you know very little about the IDF!!!
:::
:::
:::
:: You may have served with them, I doubt, given your over emotional and
:: illogical attitudes, that you ever understood them. But then what
: private
:: understands anything?
::
::
:
:
.
|
|
|
| User: "Riain Barton/ריעין ברתון" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
20 Mar 2005 09:08:26 PM |
|
|
No Jew is more "Jewish" than another Jew.
However, many American Jews like you, can be ignorant right-wing
fascists and bigots who hate others and are not better than any KKK
member or Neo-NAZI.
And any anonymous ***** on Usenet can claim anything they wish. Some
of us have enough balls to use our real names.
"Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> wrote in message
news:hYp%d.7100$b37.567@attbi_s02...
:
: "Riain Barton/ריעין ברתון" <riain@zion.org.il> wrote in message
: news:hMp%d.60417$%Y4.19236@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
:: ***** you ignorant Jew-Hating *****.
:
: It seems that you hate yourself. And BTW I am as Jewish as you are.
Most
: likely more so.
:
:: "Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> wrote in message
:: news:wbm%d.90137$Ze3.50499@attbi_s51...
:::
::: "Riain Barton/ריעין ברתון" <riain@zion.org.il> wrote in message
::: news:76k%d.41594$Q83.20573@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
:::: RUBBISH, you know very little about the IDF!!!
::::
::::
::::
::: You may have served with them, I doubt, given your over emotional
and
::: illogical attitudes, that you ever understood them. But then what
:: private
::: understands anything?
:::
:::
::
::
:
:
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
20 Mar 2005 07:57:15 PM |
|
|
Riain Barton/ריעין ברתון wrote:
***** you ignorant Jew-Hating *****.
"Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> wrote in message
news:wbm%d.90137$Ze3.50499@attbi_s51...
:
: "Riain Barton/ריעין ברתון" <riain@zion.org.il> wrote in message
: news:76k%d.41594$Q83.20573@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
:: RUBBISH, you know very little about the IDF!!!
::
::
::
: You may have served with them, I doubt, given your over emotional and
: illogical attitudes, that you ever understood them. But then what
private
: understands anything?
:
:
Sorry, Riain. As much as I hate to do so...
*PLONK*
(Darn moronic-atheists.)
You have no argument and you resort to ad hominem attacks. Bye now.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
18 Mar 2005 12:37:05 PM |
|
|
Omega (d) wrote:
"Sanders Kaufman" <usenet@kaufman.net> wrote in message
news:e7t_d.22360$yp.14380@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
: "Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> wrote in message
: news:oIs_d.145992$4q6.132143@attbi_s01...
:
:
: > : You may be right in what -you- say, but I wouldn't begin to
: > : presume to actually know about what's happening NOW, only
: > : what was before.
:
: > You are correct, this is not Vietnam. We do not a bunch of
amateurs,
that
: > is draftees, but rather professional soldiers. Thus we do not
have
: > soldiers who are more focused on getting laid by whores, getting
drunk
or doing
: > drugs as was so common in Vietnam.
:
: Draftee, involuntary extension - not too big a difference.
: The US is *still* forcing kids to fight against their will.
In most cases, it is merely a matter of months. In some cases, just
weeks.
But you go as an unit, you return as an unit. You decompress as a
group.
For one thing, it is good mental health practice. That is what we
did in
WW2.
: And instead of screwin whores, they rape prisoners.
: And instead of doing drugs, they torture prisoners.
: And instead of getting drunk, they murder prisoners.
A rather extremist view....
: > Nor do we deploy as individuals but rather as units (which is one
of the
: > two reasons for the Stop-Loss so as a unit is full 90 day before
deploying,
: > and 90 days after deploying so that the troops can decompress as
a
group).
:
: Stop Loss - NeoCon codword for "slavery".
No, just being a lot smarter than we were in Vietnam.
But then these soldiers and Marines are some of the best warriors
that this
world has ever seen.
That CAN change. Morale is EVERYthing. The longer the war rages on,
the quicker the morale will drop, -you- can already see the pressures
mounting that could herald the obliteration of the US military
as a force to deal with. Of course the US has it's propaganda ministers
working on the problem full time to divert potential disaster
while sorting out the mess.
Sorry, I believe in God and Country, but I'm also a realist.
I am also old enuff to know what the score *really* is.
Maybe I better shut up, before i end up destroying what i
believe in.
Even if Bush is wrong, he was still elected president by our
government. An I have to respect that, even tho i didn't vote
for it.
"give unto ceasar that which is due ceasar", and let G-d sort
out the rest.
bd4u
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sanders Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
18 Mar 2005 02:34:16 PM |
|
|
<gigo448@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1111171025.041365.203060@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Even if Bush is wrong, he was still elected president by our
government.
Just 9 governors - not the whole government. :)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
18 Mar 2005 12:44:26 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 04:51:22 GMT, "Sanders Kaufman"
<usenet@kaufman.net> wrote:
Draftee, involuntary extension - not too big a difference.
The US is *still* forcing kids to fight against their will.
And instead of screwin whores, they rape prisoners.
And instead of doing drugs, they torture prisoners.
And instead of getting drunk, they murder prisoners.
Stop Loss - NeoCon codword for "slavery".
With being able to get face to face with you it's difficult to
tell for sure whether you are a terrorist sympathizer, a *****
for brains dim-wit or both.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sanders Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
18 Mar 2005 01:04:35 AM |
|
|
<wbt@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:r9uk31psamctcvnppiaal7pror3mtc5b13@4ax.com...
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 04:51:22 GMT, "Sanders Kaufman"
<usenet@kaufman.net> wrote:
Draftee, involuntary extension - not too big a difference.
The US is *still* forcing kids to fight against their will.
And instead of screwin whores, they rape prisoners.
And instead of doing drugs, they torture prisoners.
And instead of getting drunk, they murder prisoners.
Stop Loss - NeoCon codword for "slavery".
With being able to get face to face with you it's difficult to
tell for sure whether you are a terrorist sympathizer, a *****
for brains dim-wit or both.
Terrorist sympathizer - and proud of it.
--
"If you see me have some dignity,
Have some sympathy and have some grace.
Use all your well-learned politesse,
Or I'll lay your soul to waste" - M.J.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Andrealphus" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
16 Mar 2005 10:54:50 PM |
|
|
No One <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:
"Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> writes:
Maybe you can try to answer a question I posed on a different
thread. Who would you prefer to have in your unit - a highly
professional gay soldier, whose sexual orientation you know but
who keeps his sex life as his own business, or a straight draftee
who would really rather be doing something else and is a bit
miffed that he got inducted at the start of the surfing season?
Or you could opt for having nobody available, but that has its
own problems. Those are basically your choices - they aren't
getting enough people and with the deficit, they'll have some
real trouble being able to raise the pay to attract more people.
We do not have draftees, which are at best amateurs.
You do not *currently* have draftees. There is, however, a
shortfall - not enough people enlisting. If it gets bad enough,
they'll start drafting people - they'll have no choice.
There are a number of reasons why will not have a draft:
1) the military does not want it
At some point, the military will prefer doing something to not having
enough people, so it is a valid question.
2) we are so short of forts and bases, most of which were cut during
the 1990s, that it takes six to 12 months to get a new enlistee into
Basic Training.
The shortfall isn't so high that you'll have to double capacity.
3) It would take over two years to get the draft up and going.
Oh, that one's lame - how long do yo think it took during WW-II?
Not that long... 6 or 7 months. It was fueled by a great many civilian
volunteers in draft boards acrossed the country. Of course, that was a
different time and a different war, I doubt that you would get that sort of
cooperation today.
--
"Only Buddhism is compatible with science. It covers the smallest
particles to the largest creations of the cosmos. It is the only
religion capable of scientific truth."
Albert Einstein
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
16 Mar 2005 11:19:45 PM |
|
|
Andrealphus wrote:
No One <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:
"Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> writes:
Maybe you can try to answer a question I posed on a different
thread. Who would you prefer to have in your unit - a highly
professional gay soldier, whose sexual orientation you know but
who keeps his sex life as his own business, or a straight draftee
who would really rather be doing something else and is a bit
miffed that he got inducted at the start of the surfing season?
Or you could opt for having nobody available, but that has its
own problems. Those are basically your choices - they aren't
getting enough people and with the deficit, they'll have some
real trouble being able to raise the pay to attract more people.
We do not have draftees, which are at best amateurs.
You do not *currently* have draftees. There is, however, a
shortfall - not enough people enlisting. If it gets bad enough,
they'll start drafting people - they'll have no choice.
There are a number of reasons why will not have a draft:
1) the military does not want it
At some point, the military will prefer doing something to not having
enough people, so it is a valid question.
2) we are so short of forts and bases, most of which were cut during
the 1990s, that it takes six to 12 months to get a new enlistee into
Basic Training.
The shortfall isn't so high that you'll have to double capacity.
3) It would take over two years to get the draft up and going.
Oh, that one's lame - how long do yo think it took during WW-II?
Not that long... 6 or 7 months. It was fueled by a great many civilian
volunteers in draft boards acrossed the country. Of course, that was a
different time and a different war, I doubt that you would get that sort of
cooperation today.
Right. We'd need to be attacked on our mainland and we'd need to attack
the country responsible for it and....oh...crap...that has happened.
Right after 9/11, I was thinking about going to the local recruiting
office and signing up myself to attack those scumsucking pigs myself.
And I'm a liberal wussy (as I've been labeled many a time). In fact,
all I had to do was wait until I finished a temporary position I was
working at and I was going to go down there.
Then the president stated that he didn't care about those that attacked
us and was, instead, going to go to a totally different country... less
then 4 months after being attacked. I chose not to join after that.
If we were attacked in this country and 100,000 people were killed,
there wouldn't be the need for a draft; you'd have tens of thousands of
people signing up to join.
(By the way, why isn't there a draft in Iraq? According to latest
figures, 8 million people voted in Iraq. Let's say half of those are
women and currently women wouldn't be allowed into the military. So,
that's 4 million potential draftees in the military. How long would it
take to secure Iraq with 4 million draftees? Even with the 85%
desertion rate (as has been reported as well), that's still 600,000
troops. Didn't Bush say that what was needed to secure Iraq was about
200,000 Iraqi troops? I don't have those figures handy, but even 15% of
those that voted would be enough to secure Iraq without the need for
Amerian soldiers. So, again, I ask, why is there no Iraqi Draft?)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sanders Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
16 Mar 2005 10:16:05 PM |
|
|
"Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> wrote in message
news:Nf7_d.144368$tl3.25509@attbi_s02...
Thus I think that we will not be seeing a draft any time soon...
Not through the front door, anyway.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Omega" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
16 Mar 2005 11:04:16 PM |
|
|
"Sanders Kaufman" <usenet@kaufman.net> wrote in message
news:9w7_d.12831$WK2.11465@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com...
: "Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> wrote in message
: news:Nf7_d.144368$tl3.25509@attbi_s02...
:
: > Thus I think that we will not be seeing a draft any time soon...
:
: Not through the front door, anyway.
A draft is only one thing, the conversion of the unorganized militia
(otherwise known as the Strategic Military Reserve or civilians) into
members of the military, active or reserve. If we ever do have a draft, it
would most likely be into the National Guard (or reserves) as there would be
less need for bases or housing. And the kids could still go to college.
As for the "Back Door", once you enlist the military owns you. It is nearly
a lifetime commitment these days. Basic commitment is 8 years which can be
done as a mix of active, reserve duty or IRR.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sanders Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
17 Mar 2005 12:31:54 AM |
|
|
"Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> wrote in message
news:kd8_d.144363$4q6.13287@attbi_s01...
"Sanders Kaufman" <usenet@kaufman.net> wrote in message
As for the "Back Door", once you enlist the military owns you. It is
nearly
a lifetime commitment these days. Basic commitment is 8 years which can
be
done as a mix of active, reserve duty or IRR.
I remember getting a *serious* sunburn, tanning on the flight deck on the
way to Hawaii.
The XO warned us about the danger of sunburn and said that if we got one
he'd charge us with destruction of Gov't. Property.
But they don't, as you and he say, OWN you.
The commitment does not mean indentured servitude for life.
There are limits.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
