tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10820485.post4550057634647505808..comments2023-11-03T09:36:22.100-04:00Comments on In From the Cold: DADT (Afghanistan Edition)George Smileyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07049707648660651119noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10820485.post-68087528311268527132011-02-10T21:30:30.121-05:002011-02-10T21:30:30.121-05:00I came across this blog after just hearing on the ...I came across this blog after just hearing on the news that United States Forces Afghanistan leadership stand "ready" to enact the guidance in support of the recent repeal of "Don't Ask Don't Tell" (DADT) Policy, and that they believed that the repeal would have minimal impact on US Forces. There was no mention, however, of the impact on relations with the host nation. This issue is a first heard for me in terms of how homosexuality is an issue and affecting another culture, not to mention an Arab culture. Having learned of this problem, I would say that from a national perspective, if the Afghan People were to label the US as hypocrites, they would be correct. <br />Many people in the US society have a skewed view of the impacts of homosexuality on humanity. When reading comments like in this blog: "It's not about homosexuality as much as it is about the young boys...", I cannot help but question do we not recognize that homosexual men were once boys and that whether exposed in youth or adulthood the end result is still the same? I say that we do recognize that it is the same, but have somehow convinced ourselves that our situation is “different.”<br />From a military perspective, as an Army officer, I understand that all military service members have taken the oath which includes obeying the orders of the President of the United States. I, therefore, believe that the recent news broadcast with the United States Forces Afghanistan leadership is merely a part of honoring the commitment that we have made, rather than a sincere embracing of the DADT policy repeal or belief that there will be minimal impact. Resultantly, they (we) will have to suffer the backlash of our nation’s hypocrisy, even though it is beyond our control. I have read news reports about extensive poling of US service members on our thoughts about the possibility of repeal; however, I never received a survey, nor has any other random service member that I query. This convinces me that this is more a matter of political agenda than about civil rights.<br /><br />MAJ SRJ<br />United States ArmyMAJ SRJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17005465286901699799noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10820485.post-72555958278050625222011-01-07T22:16:00.449-05:002011-01-07T22:16:00.449-05:00Muslim tribal society leads families/tribes to loc...Muslim tribal society leads families/tribes to lock up and hoard their women, leading to an excess of males with, well, too much time on their hands.<br /><br />I'd read anecdotal accounts that, although it was highly illegal, young male Saudis took an interest in homosexuality since they might not ever see a woman,Evil Sandmichhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06094558583013380137noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10820485.post-18242531903218334882010-12-22T15:47:35.191-05:002010-12-22T15:47:35.191-05:00This whole thing is bizarre and puzzling. Correct...This whole thing is bizarre and puzzling. Correct me if I'm wrong -- before DADT, the armed forces established their policy towards homosexuality by way of interpreting the UCMJ. They chose to allow orientation but not conduct. You could be gay but not have gay sex. Congress passed a law that imposed a new policy on the armed forces -- you could be gay as long as you kept it a secret. Now that DADT is repealed, don't the armed forces now take back the mantle of having to establish a policy toward homosexuality in accordance with the UCMJ? Which pretty much precludes practicing homosexuals from serving in the military?<br /><br />Obviously gay persons can continue to enlist and keep their orientation a secret, but now they will no longer have the protection of DADT. Now, it appears, the military once again has the freedom to conduct investigations into servicemembers orientation, including forcing them to state their sexual orientation under oath.<br /><br />So why is the repeal of DADT being reported as "allowing openly gay soldiers to enlist and serve"? It seems to me that that requires modification of the UCMJ. Does Barack Obama really think that the incoming Republican Congress is going to modify the UCMJ to allow openly gay soldiers to serve, or has this Congress just knifed the entire gay military community in the back on its way out because they don't even understand how the law works?jmshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04874776420064635278noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10820485.post-10206865328500868002010-12-22T12:54:11.943-05:002010-12-22T12:54:11.943-05:00Wow. Just...wow.Wow. Just...wow.Chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10899266928036644916noreply@blogger.com