Sources: Pentagon group finds there is minimal risk to lifting gay ban during war

[cynatnite]

Source: Washington Post

A Pentagon study group has concluded that the military can lift the ban on gays serving openly in uniform with only minimal and isolated incidents of risk to the current war efforts, according to two people familiar with a draft of the report, which is due to President Obama on Dec. 1.

More than 70 percent of respondents to a survey sent to active-duty and reserve troops over the summer said the effect of repealing the "don't ask, don't tell" policy would be positive, mixed or nonexistent, said two sources familiar with the document. The survey results led the report's authors to conclude that objections to openly gay colleagues would drop once troops were able to live and serve alongside them.

One source, who has read the report in full, summarized its findings in a series of conversations this week. The source declined to state his position on whether or not to lift the ban, insisting it did not matter. He said he felt compelled to share the information out of concern that groups opposed to ending the ban would mischaracterize the findings. The long, detailed and nuanced report will almost certainly be used by opponents and supporters of repeal legislation to bolster their positions in what is likely to be a heated and partisan congressional debate.

President Obama has vowed to end the ban. Senior Pentagon officials requested the survey to address areas in which the repeal might cause conflicts that could hinder the military's ability to fight.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/10/AR2010111007381.html?wpisrc=nl_polalert

[aquart]

1. Do it, dimwits!

[NewJeffCT]

2. I wonder how the RWers will twist the findings

to their ends.

But, it's good to see over 70% positive, mixed or nonexistent after many thought it would be lower.

[and-justice-for-all]

3. What war?

it is called an invasion/occupation, not a war.

[jberryhill]

6. Yeah, well, it's not fair to exclude LGBT's from participating in illegal aggressive war /nt

[Crowman1979]

4. All the RW-assholes will only listen to their sacred cows...I mean generals.

Who are mostly from the same political ilk as they are. Of course, in my squadron I'd say about 10-15% was LGBT and no one threw a shitfit about it.

[defendandprotect]

5. Of course ... this is simply POLITICAL ....

[BrentWil]

7. Sources: Pentagon group finds there is minimal risk to lifting gay ban during war

Source: ABC News

A Pentagon study group has concluded that the military can lift the ban on gays serving openly in uniform with only minimal and isolated incidents of risk to the current war efforts, according to two people familiar with a draft of the report, which is due to President Obama on Dec. 1.

More than 70 percent of respondents to a survey sent to active-duty and reserve troops over the summer said the effect of repealing the "don't ask, don't tell" policy would be positive, mixed or nonexistent, said two sources familiar with the document. The survey results led the report's authors to conclude that objections to openly gay colleagues would drop once troops were able to live and serve alongside them.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/10/AR2010111007381.html?hpid=topnews

---

Wow. Prehaps we will see a repeal.

[jsgindc]

8. No Shit Sherlock.

It's been that way for years.

[bigworld]

9. This is despite the questions being loaded and leaning.

Good for you troops!

[BrentWil]

10. Its still big news...

This is THE study everyone has been talking about. I am surprised it supports our position, given that it is coming out of the Pentagon.

[supernova]

11. Not scientific but

I suspect the reason is the "boots on the ground" are way younger and much more tolerant than their power hungry superiors looking to stroke the RW war machine.

[Moonwalk]

12. But you'll note that it's not....

"No risk" :sarcasm:

How much ya wanna bet that the "risk" will come up however "minimal"? And just what is this minimal risk anyway? Is national security on the line? They made it seem like it was in asking the appeals court to put on hold the judge's orders to do away with DADT....