THe PC Police Again Shut Down Truth Seaking

@hawkeye10,

Hawkeye stress?????????????

The stress is now more then WW1 or WW2 or the Korean war or Vietnam or any other damn conflict we been in the last 100 years or so!!!!!!!

Give me a damn break you just do not like gays just as people did not like blacks or Jews or whatever group.

Shame on you for trying to find excuses to harm soldiers who are servicing their country with honor.

Talk about suicide rates I wonder how many of those suicides was driven by gay soldiers who needed to hide their sexuality.

How many fine soldiers did the policy you so happily support end up killing my friend?

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

The stress is now more then WW1 or WW2 or the Korean war or Vietnam or any other damn conflict we been in the last 100 years or so

how long did ww1 last? ww2? You are compairing apples and oranges.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

No the homosexuals soldiers just need to take the added pressure of hiding their sexuality beside the normal pressure you are claiming is so great.

Yes you reality give a **** about our soldiers welfare that is only if they are straight

Hell not even then as you would as if need be replace first rate soldiers with second rate soldiers and if that cause deaths of straight soldiers so be it.

Having a 100 percent straight military is far more important then having the best people in combat roles.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

You are amazing in how far you will go to defend your anti-soldier position.

Tell me how less stressful those conflicts happen to be indeed!!!!!!!!

Also we had a large number of poor WW2 vets who ended up fighting in the Korean war so for that group you can add the time of ww2 and Korean together!!!!!!

My father almost ended up in that position as a matter of fact.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

Quote:

No the homosexuals soldiers just need to take the added pressure of hiding their sexuality beside the normal pressure you are claiming is so great.

Yes you reality give a **** about our soldiers welfare that is only if they are straight

if a few homosexuals suffer because we need to maintain the effectiveness and well being of the force in total then so be it. The benefits of the many, the whole country who need an effective military, out weights the benefits of the few, a few gays who are currently in the military or might want to be who object to the current terms of service.

I think it is time to call a whambulance for you. If anyone was talking about not ever making the change I would be sympathetic to your argument, but since all we are talking about is timing and what the priorities of the nation are your whining that you don't get what you want RIGHT NOW is a bit pathetic.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

We are not talking about the timing at all as you and others like you would drag your feet for the next thousand years if you could get away with it.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

We are not talking about the timing at all as you and others like you would drag your feet for the next thousand years if you could get away with it.

Your lack of faith in people is something that you might want to work on.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

As you had been whining on an other thread about the current fate of the poor white straight male and as you had disregard the very military think tank that you had quoted yourself on this thread conclusion that having open gays servicing is more then doable you good faith is in question.

Perhaps you do not even know this about yourself however it seem clear to me that you judge how well you are doing in life by how many others you can find a reasons to look down on.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Read his posts if you get excruciatingly bored and you will see his hate of people and his attempts to mask it by demanding action from others.

0 Replies

Did anyone besides me notice that the current plan for dealing with this problem largely encompass what I pointed out are the problems?? I believe that history has once again validated my ideas as correct.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Sorry but the only thing the current plan denote is a political balancing act and a lack of moral courage to cut the **** out and do the correct thing at once.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Maybe, but you can't deny that my side won the argument in Washington. I also think that it is a solution that the majority of Americans can support, though I have not yet seen any polling.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

You won?

What had you won the right to ruin a few more lives of a few more soldiers before we in the end stop this silliness?

The right to denial needed train men to the military for a few more years?

A few more men dying because the very best man for a position was not here because he happen not to be straight and the second best man was not good enough?

Yes I can see why you would be proud as the last gay soldier is picture being kick out of the military for no good reason one minute before the policy is change forever.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

good sense won out over radicalism.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

good sense won out over radicalism.

The congress and good sense?

Sorry it is nothing more then a very cowardly political settlement and have zero to do with logic or commonsense or what is best for the country or the military.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

it is nothing more then a very cowardly political settlement and have zero to do with logic or commonsense or what is best for the country or the military.

And how do you know more than everyone else , oh great one ?

0 Replies

So Congress will not repeal DADT, and the courts seem ready to do it themselves....does anyone see a connection here? I am thinking that the GOP is refusing to repeal this law even though few really expect that it will be around long, because they are baiting the courts to overstep their bounds YET AGAIN, that this is going to be used as evidence that the courts need to be shackled. Maybe the gambit is to force SCOTUS to rule on this, to finally have a case where the determination is made that right that the courts have grabbed to overrule the Legislature is unconstitutional??

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Nah. Election year politicking.

The bill will eventually pass, but not until after the November elections, and the Republicans still won't have the votes to remove the repeal amendment from it.

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

Quote:

The bill will eventually pass, but not until after the November elections, and the Republicans still won't have the votes to remove the repeal amendment from it.

Politicking I could believe, though I am not sure how this helps, but are you actually claiming that the Dems will pick up seats in Nov?? That sounds delusional. The dems are not going to have 60 votes to do anything after nov

1 Reply

@Ionus,

How would you know?

1 Reply

THe PC Police Again Shut Down Truth Seaking

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know