Second Thoughts on Gays in the Military (Shalikashvili)

[struggle4progress]

By JOHN M. SHALIKASHVILI
Published: January 2, 2007
Steilacoom, Wash.

TWO weeks ago, President Bush called for a long-term plan to increase the size of the armed forces. As our leaders consider various options for carrying out Mr. Bush’s vision, one issue likely to generate fierce debate is “don’t ask, don’t tell,” the policy that bars openly gay service members from the military. Indeed, leaders in the new Congress are planning to re-introduce a bill to repeal the policy next year ...

The question before us now is whether enough time has gone by to give this policy serious reconsideration. Much evidence suggests that it has.

Last year I held a number of meetings with gay soldiers and marines, including some with combat experience in Iraq, and an openly gay senior sailor who was serving effectively as a member of a nuclear submarine crew. These conversations showed me just how much the military has changed, and that gays and lesbians can be accepted by their peers.

This perception is supported by a new Zogby poll of more than 500 service members returning from Afghanistan and Iraq, three quarters of whom said they were comfortable interacting with gay people. And 24 foreign nations, including Israel, Britain and other allies in the fight against terrorism, let gays serve openly, with none reporting morale or recruitment problems ...

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/02/opinion/02shalikashvili.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

[JI7]

1. this is so good to hear

we are wayyyyyyyy behind on this issue.

[closeupready]

2. here's the problem with using "morale" or "recruitment problems" as the benchmark

And that is that you are validating homophobia. So that you empower those who wish to subjugate a certain class of people. And also those who just like to push other people around. Not saying that this is the intent, but that is the effect.

[struggle4progress]

4. I'm not endorsing Shalikashvili's argument -- but it suggests an ..

.. interesting (if slightly cynical) attack on "Don't Ask Don't Tell": namely, play the Bushista need to recruit troops for Iraq against DADT, arguing that DADT has reduced enlistment and forced good troops to leave the service.

It's slightly cynical because I really don't want anybody to enlist while Iraq continues to fester, so I'd want to make the anti-DADT argument to hawks while hoping potential soldiers didn't sign up.

But the fun of watching the conservatives squirm over the dilemma might make the cynicism worthwhile.

[closeupready]

5. Oh, I see. yeah,

that is fun to watch - schadenfreude, anyone? :evilgrin: :)

[nosmokes]

3. those countries believe in evolution and don't have a problem with a

woman's breast either, especially when it's on a statue or she's feeding her baby.

can i get an amen?

[Lyric]

6. As much as I don't want to see any Family folks getting shipped to Iraq...

...I do believe that the GLBTs who *want* to be in the military should have that choice, without having to closet themselves.

It pisses me off, though. We're not good enough for the military when there's peace and prosperity. But when the body count is rising, recruitment is falling, and they're looking for more cannon fodder--then we're suddenly good enough.

@$@#$%^@#$^#$^#!!!!!!!! :grr: :banghead: :grr: :banghead: