BF2S Forums The Army needs to get its priorities straight

AussieReaper wrote:

lowing wrote:

for some perhaps. Apparently you have no problem being checked out by a gay guy, others might feel differently.

So what if they do? Doesn't change my sexuality if a gay person looks at me.

AussieReaper wrote:

lowing wrote:

gee and to think you left out bunking and showering together........and yes Aussie the animosity from those situations can be brought into the foxhole or work place and cause a distraction.

As a matter of fact, why don't you grow a set of balls, join up and find out what you are talking about?

lol so you do think that a squad will turn gay if they shower together? Wow. Maybe you're just so insecure about your own sexuality you think if a gay guy hits on you, you wouldn't know how to react and it would be the same in the military. lol

No, I don't need to join up to prove my worth to the world. Maybe you could share your extensive military combat experience and how it's helped shape you into a functional member of society, if you'd like.

Do aircraft mechanics see a lot of front line combat?

lowing wrote:

If you could point me to the post where I said a gay guy was going to turn a squad guy I would appreciate it. I said it would be a destraction, and it would.

I just assumed you would want to join since you feel so opinionated as to how others are supposed to feel about showering with a gay guy or bunking with one. but I forgot, you are content with letting others fight and die for your right to bitch.

If you read up I said foxholes or work places. In Iraq there were a few aircraft mechanics killed on the base, yes. But you really wouldn't know that would you?

lowing wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

So because there's a gay guy in the foxholes that's going to completely turn the squad gay and they'll be too busy making out to concentrate on the situation at hand. That's your basic argument?

gee and to think you left out bunking and showering together........and yes Aussie the animosity from those situations can be brought into the foxhole or work place and cause a distraction.

lowing wrote:

Yes Aussie while I was there our base came under rocket attacks, and yes I did more than my share of running for bunkers, and yes a rocket exploded around 30-50 ft from me, knocking me to the ground and killing a soldier on the other side of it. That is the extent of my experiences. How about you?

burnzz wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

Never been in combat myself. As you ran for the bunker did you worry it might have a gay person inside?

what a horrible thing to ask!? there was a 50% chance

Manzella said he was read his rights and told that he would be investigated, but that he could continue working. As the investigation proceeded, word spread that Manzella was gay.

"Ironically, it pulled the unit together. A lot of them started to invite me out," Manzella said.

Last edited by AussieReaper (2009-11-11 19:18:12)

AussieReaper wrote:

Y
They would join up to fight for freedom and you would deny them theirs.

You do see that don't you?

Hurricane2k9 wrote:

Lowing, the thing about DADT is that all it does is make gays keep it secret. A gay guy who's quiet about it has the same chance of catching a peek at some guy's junk as a gay guy who's open about it.

Might I ask, do you prefer the USMC style of boot camp where women and men train separately? Or the Army (and I think USAF and Navy) style of mixed training?

lowing wrote:

Maintaining the discipline, integrity,and  cohesion of a unit out weighs a persons "right" to defend their country.

lowing wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

lowing wrote:

for some perhaps. Apparently you have no problem being checked out by a gay guy, others might feel differently.

So what if they do? Doesn't change my sexuality if a gay person looks at me.

We already established you have no problem with a gay guy cock gazing at you while you shower, now how about a little respect for others who might find it uncomfortable

Hurricane2k9 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Hurricane2k9 wrote:

Lowing, the thing about DADT is that all it does is make gays keep it secret. A gay guy who's quiet about it has the same chance of catching a peek at some guy's junk as a gay guy who's open about it.

Might I ask, do you prefer the USMC style of boot camp where women and men train separately? Or the Army (and I think USAF and Navy) style of mixed training?

separate, women are also a distraction.  although the separation in the dorms, showers, jobs etc does make it an easier.

Women might be in jets, and choppers etc.. but they are not in spec ops units, or in the fight with front line infantry.

That's because most women simply don't have the physical profiles that males do. And the fact that if taken as a POW they could be raped (obviously men could be too, but it's far more likely for a female POW). They are just as good as soldiers/sailors/airwomen/Marines... General MacArthur said that the women in the WAC were his best soldiers.

Anyway, I think that gays ought to be allowed to serve and even be open about it. The military ought to focus on more important things when looking at potential recruits... e.g. if they're psychotic, if they're fanatics of any religion, etc. And it ought to take action when a soldier starts showing the signs that Hasan showed.

Also, gays ought to just be treated like any other soldier in regards to sexual conduct. No inappropriate contact, no sexual assault or harassment (I think that in general the military needs to take a harder stance on this, although this is based off of news reports and for all I know sexual assault really isn't that common in the military).