In December, the lame duck session of Congress coming to grips with their sudden and looming loss of power to ram destructive laws down our throats passed a repeal of the law popularly known as Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. But, repeal wasn’t automatic.
In order for repeal to become effective, the president, the Secretary of Defense, and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff must certify that changing it will not hurt the armed services’ readiness, morale or cohesion. A few weeks ago, Pentagon officials told a House subcommittee that training for implementation of repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” ( DADT ) has gone “extremely well so far” and that certification to Congress might come by mid-summer.
Here’s the problem: the “training” has nothing to do with certifying that the repeal will not hurt the armed services’ readiness, morale or cohesion. There are no polls being conducted. Troops aren’t being included in focus groups. Units aren’t being asked to include evidence to support or refute the effects of repeal. Nothing. Instead, troops are being trained to “just accept it.”
The briefing being given to troops has two stated purposes: inform about repeal and its effects and NOT to change beliefs. It lists 10 guiding principles:
1. Leadership matter most
2. Standard of conduct apply to everyone regardless of sexual orientation
3. Treat each other with dignity and respect
4. Application of our rules and policies must be sexual orientation neutral
5. Emphasize our role as professional soldiers
6. Keep it simple
7. There is no expectation to change religious or moral views
8. Good order and discipline will be maintained at all times
9. Chaplains have both the right to serve and conduct religious services according to their faith, and a duty to perform or provide religious support
10. Stay focused on your mission
A report in Yahoo! News today highlights the fact that troops are being to basically fall in line. There is no training or focus on meeting the intent of repeal in determining how it will affect the military. All three tiers of DADT Repeal Training focus on the facts of what repeal means and doesn’t ever touch on the effects of readiness, morale or cohesion as required by the bill signed into law.
Units are required to report weekly on their progress in training troops on the new policy. No attempts are made to report on possible effects as far as I can tell. The pressure on units is to report numbers, not effects. The goal seems to be just training 100% of the force as quickly as possible. Commanders and trainers are kept to strict script and advised not to deviate from it. How can effects on readiness, morale or cohesion be measured and accurately reported to Congress if they aren’t being asked?
As a Soldier, we do what we’re told. I will enforce all laws, regulations, and policies affecting my service as all good professionals do, regardless of my personal feelings on the matter. My concern is that Congress and the American people are getting whitewashed on the effects of repeal.
According to the Yahoo! article:
The Marines expect to finish training on the new policy by June 1, Gen. James Amos, the Marine Corps commandant, testified in Congress earlier this month.
Amos testified last year that permitting gays to openly serve could disrupt smaller combat units and distract leaders from preparing for battle. When he appeared this month before the House Armed Services Committee, he said he had been looking for problems that might arise under the new policy and hadn’t found any “recalcitrant pushback.”
“There has not been the anxiety over it from the forces in the field,” he said.
I respectfully disagree. There IS anxiety. The problem is that it isn’t being measured or discussed. There is a HUGE rift between the troops on the ground and their leaders in the Pentagon that think everything is just hunky dory.
A good friend of mine is an immigrant from a very rural farming area of S Korea, he has gone off recently to join the US Marines, I’m proud to have friends like that. In his specific part of the world there is no “gay” people, so all the talk about DADT has “confused him” to say the least, as he has expressed in his last e-mail. He thought he was becoming a marine to find significance and be a part of something great; not join a focus group and have “girl talk”. I know it has not deterred him, but it has not been the highlight of his experience ether. Confusing for a fellow like him, I think. I can’t say I would feel any differently.
How nice to sit at a desk and tell hundreds of thousands of warriors how to think, act, and speak. How to be politically correct in 90 days. It might work; that is a big ‘might’ though.
I think Rich should tell us how the Marines of forty years ago would have responded to these new guidelines forty years ago in private and in public. He is a former Marine officer and is aware of some of the philosophy of training in the last of the “Old Corps”. It wasn’t necessarily politically correct, but it formed a very efficient fighting machine.
I will say that the modern Marine is extremely well trained; however, the older Marines would have had problems, at least according to my memories of the past. I can only speak for Marines. I spent some time in Army ROTC, but didn’t pursue the program. Thus I can only speak from memory.
Part of the training, a major portion of the training in boot camp was meant to break the recruit down and remodel him into a Marine. This sometimes included screaming at the recruit who was on the verge of breaking down or about to cry, asking if he was gay and ridiculing him to try and get him to break. It was far better to weed out the weak ones in boot camp. Often the weaker recruits responded to the hazing and became stronger; actually, this is the hoped for result of the rigorous training, others wash out and go home. I had to take several physicals and aptitude tests because of scoring well and spent several boring days in the hospital and saw some guys who washed out because they were actually gay. That was interesting and confusing, but they had to go through a process to be shipped home.
This is the truth as I remember it; you may have heard some grumblings that the Corps will be the least likely to accept this new political move. I think this is why. I don’t discriminate against gay people: I work for many of them; although, I try to discourage people from sharing their sexual orientation and escapades with me. With gay or straight people, I expect a certain amount of decorum and polite discourse; otherwise, they should expect a much larger invoice. In my business, I only depend on myself. If I make a mistake, there is a good chance I will get hurt, but I have no one else to blame. Whether blame is real or imagined, gays will be considered the weakest link in the chain.
One thing for sure, none of the guys in the pic on the heading will be taking chances on anything other than their careers and career injuries rarely need medical attention. Therefore, if the Pres says do it, they are going to do it, regardless of the opinions and feelings of the troops. May God watch over our troops; because those A-holes in the pic aren’t watching over them.
Prime example of giving a Political Decision a priority. For those in the know, this Political Decision is putting the cart before the horse. It absolutely mandates a revision of the UCMJ which is no small tasking.
3% of the American Population is currently serving. Lets take this to a new level of stupid, a US Armed Forces that is totally reflective of Society which means that the number of Males VS Females needs to be observed and the number of Male Service Members should be trimmed back. To Hell with Combat Readiness, Unit Cohesion and Combat Effectiveness, lets stupidify this deal beyond recognition. That means Females in Combat Arms and in Combat since the Idiots in Congress chose to meddle with this deal and the US will soon cut back on the Defense Budget to fund their Vote Buying Projects anyway.
Who Served… http://www.whoserved.com/
Lets see how many Military Experts are in the Executive, Judicial and Legislative Branches.
this is appauling to use that while at WAR, I repeat while at war, while at war,
don’t they understand? you must not disrupt the military in a warzone by adding more stress situation for them, they have enough of the COMMANDER IN CHIEF RULES OF ENGAGEMENT TO COPE WITH,
it has been declare that the number of demorolyse soldiers has increase dangerously
since the last 2 years, the COMMANDERS ARE BEING BULLY TO ACCEPT THE DEAL BUT FRANKLY,
THEY DON’T AGREE WITH IT, AND THEY ARE FORCE TO IMPOSE THE LAW TO THE ALREADY STRESS BY MANY RETURNED TO THE WARZONE, DISGRACEFULL TO THE COMMANDER TO DO IT THEY SHOULD HAVE FOUGHT IT FOR THE PROTECTION OF THEIR BRAVES, WHO YES WHO? WILL TALK ON THEIR BEHALF, LOUD ENOUGH TO GET THEM TO PROTECT THE ONE WHO RECEIVE THE ORDER TO DYE
FOR HIS COUNTRY, IS THAT AMERICA OR DID WE LOST IT,
@Old Trooper 2:
I agree with your comments. As for me personally, I don’t care if someone is gay or not. I don’t judge them by that. And I’m sure that there’s been numerous gay soldiers who have served this country well, including combat actions. What I don’t understand, and the people pushing this have never answered, is why would one want to place any more burdens on the backs of our soldiers than they already have?
Your right, OT2, they are ‘stupidifying’ this deal beyond recognition.
They are “Stupidfying” for a political agenda at no risk to the “men” who are pushing this aberration off on the military: the risk is for the men on the line and the officers who lead them. If morale and discipline breaks down those on the line will pay for these unnecessary actions with blood and their lives.
Oh yes, those with the braid and the stars are being so noble and politically correct, but for what reasons? They are deserting those who risk it all, but for what reasons? They jockey for position, they have become politicians so that political leaders have control of the military and make it into a politically correct military at the expense performance and possibly a general collapse.
How can I make such an outlandish statement: how can they gamble so much by assuming it will work.
when you’r under the line of fire, a split second of distraction will mean,
that you get kill or blow up from a cluster of bombs underneath your feet,
and don’t think It wont happen, with the company of some known to have vulnerable nervous system
getting their emotions to surface in an outburst of distracting behaviour, they are like that,
and taking a chance is to be responsible for this to happen at the cost of lifes from the BRAVES,
EVEN WORSE COULD HAPPEN THAT THEY WILL HAVE TO SHOOT THOSE WHO BECOME UNSELF CONTROLLED ON A STAGE OF WAR AMMUNITIONS ACTIVE EXCHANGE TO OBLITARATE THE ENNEMIES. IMAGINE THE GOVERNMENT AND THE PENTAGONE BEING RESPONSIBLE
OF DEATH OF THEIR SOLDIERS, THEY ARE SUPPOSE TO HAVE THE JUDGEMENT TO PROTECT
UNDO ARMS TO THEIR SOLDIERS, THAT IS WHAT THEIR RANK CALL FOR TO BE,
IF THEY THINK THAT WOULD WORK, THEY SHOULD RESIGN IN BLOCK, BECAUSE THEY LOST TOUCH WITH THE REAL FACTS INVOLVED IN A WARZONE AND BECAME INCOMPETANT TO CARRY THEIR RESPONSABILITYS,
THE JOB DEMAND OF THEM TO BLATANTLY NEGATE THAT LAW,AND NO DISCUSSION INVOLVED, JUST LIKE A MARINE PREVIOUS COMMANDER HAD STATED A FEW MONTHS AGO
END OF IT.
We had DADT training the other day. The biggest problem: Heterosexual servicemembers must bunk and shower with homosexuals. You have no grounds to complain. If you don’t like it, leave the service.
This will be a huge problem.
The other problem will be deployment and redeployment events. Many families will not bring their children to see two men engaged in long, passionate kissing. The piers and hangars will have little or no heterosexual families in them — only heterosexual servicemembers who have to be there.
Welcome to the new “normal.”
Adirondack Patriot, yes , we need more patriots comments now lets flood this blog with your comments,
they didn’t ask you what your view was, or if they did some It was in a intimidate circonstance to block your comment, but here AT FA, nobody will try it, those who are serving in afghanistan and other stages of service, those who came back, LETS HAVE YOUR COMMENT, WE ARE ON YOUR SIDE.
“The mission of the United States military is not to accommodate behavior, and definitely not to accommodate sexual behavior. But right now, what is most important for us to be talking about?
“In this past week, we had the Taliban infiltrate a gentlemen into the Afghan security forces who shot six American soldiers. Killed them. What we should be talking about are rules of engagement and the strategic objectives that will lead to our victory and our success against this enemy.
“Instead, we are worrying about who is sleeping with who in the military. That’s crazy. So I think right now don’t ask, don’t tell is not the thing the American people expect the House and the Senate and the senior military leadership to be talking about. What they want to know is how do we protect our sons and daughters on the battlefield, how do we make sure that we are promoting victory, and how do we make sure that we take this fight to the enemy and not allow them to bring the fight to us.”
-Allen West
@Zac: The Defense of the Constitution, the Nation and Our Allies is the Primary Duty. The Armed Forces is not the proper venue for Social Experiments or Political cheap tricks.
The Mission comes First. It is all about Priorities set by National Command Authority. When Priorities are Political the Mission goes out the window, Troops and Leaders lose focus and then Bad Things Happen to Good People.
@Old Trooper 2: Rich refuses to comment on the subject, after Skookum asked him too and I don’t know why… But although I’ve never met any of these people who have served, I find it hard to believe they don’t serve. They just keep their mouths shut and do as they are told, I’m sure. Nobody sees a good, strong military as a place where personal preferences of any kind factor into service to ones country and the mission at hand. So as far as that goes, I agree; its just a few bad apples at the top trying to gather votes…
Cheap parlor tricks.
@Zac: When there is a lack of Focus and Leadership at the Top
it is nothing but detrimental to the Military and the Discipline, Combat Effectiveness, Unit Cohesion and Readiness suffers. Leave the Social Experiments out of National Defense or the Mission Focus becomes Political. Then look out!
This Administration has done Foreign Policy poorly, destroyed decade old Alliances and seems to want a politically correct Military. That is a recipe for a weak America and an unstable World Situation.
-I’m just going to steal a reference from an article I found.
A former American general blamed “open homosexuality” in the Dutch army for the failure to prevent the Srebrenica massacre in 1995.
The Dutch government condemned the comments by Gen John Sheehan, a former Nato commander and senior marine officer, as outrageous.
Gen Sheehan made the remarks at a Senate hearing where he argued against plans by President Barack Obama to end a ban on allowing gays to serve openly in the US military.
Gen Sheehan said that after the end of the Cold War, European militaries changed and concluded “there was no longer a need for an active combat capability.”
He said this process included “open homosexuality” which resulted in “a focus on peacekeeping operations because they did not believe the Germans were going to attack again or the Soviets were coming back.”
“The case in point that I’m referring to is when the Dutch were required to defend Srebrenica against the Serbs,” he said, referring to the UN peacekeeping force deployed to protect Bosnian Muslim civilians.
“The battalion was understrength, poorly led, and the Serbs came into town, handcuffed the soldiers to the telephone poles, marched the Muslims off and executed them.”
Carl Levin, the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, pressed him to clarify his comments.
“Did the Dutch leaders tell you it (the fall of Srebrenica) was because there were gay soldiers there?” asked an incredulous Levin.
“Yes,” Sheehan said and added: “They included that as part of the problem.”
Gen Sheehan, who retired from the military in 1997, said he had been told that by the former chief of staff of the Dutch army.
@Zac: Srebrenica was a result of a less than vigilant and less than Combat Ready Force vs some very tough hombres that observed no rules and were Focused on Their Mission. I was deployed on a NATO Mission and We succeeded where the UN had failed.
You had Command and Control issues as well as Decision by Committee and a lack of Command Structure.
The KFOR Missions and Balkan Missions conducted by the NATO Forces were effective but the UN Missions were doomed to failure from the get go. As a sidebar the Dutch Forces had a Trade Union as well but that is not a well known fact.
Well, if Rich is engaged with other priorities, I must ask, are there any Liberal servicemen out there that care to defend this political move by the administration? Officers and NCOs preferably, but we will listen to anyone with the brass to step forward. Grunts and others who served on the line will have priority. If you state that you have service in particular years don’t be offended if you are asked questions pertinent from those years, we have men who have served from Korea forward and are still familiar with weapons, places, and time sequences. We just want someone to defend this insult to the fighting men of today and yesterday. We know there have been gays who served silently for fear of being outed or worse and we know they have served honorably, so don’t be afraid to step forward.
A trade union?!.. In the military? That’s about the worst idea I have ever heard. Maybe they were arguing for collective bargaining rights. Well that’s an eye opener.
Maybe this type of military is in the current US agenda. I can say I’ve never questioned the last administrations patriotism; but the current one….
Zac thank you for bringing ALLEN WEST SO EFFECTIVE RESPONSE TO THIS MATTER OF MOST IMPORTANCE, YES WEST IS BEST, WE HAVE FOUND IT SO MANY TIME,
WHEN HE SPOKE HIS MIND ON ISSUES IMPORTANT TO ALL AMERICANS WHO REJECT ONE OR MANY OF IT, we must have a leader who care for AMERICA’S MOST VALUED BRAVES , where ever
they serve diligently around the world to keep the PEACE AND FREEDOM WORKING,
AGAINST MANY ODDS ON MOST TIME THEY NEED A VOICE AT THE TOP ,
A MILITARY BRAVE MAN WHO SERVED IN WARZONE WILL BECOME A BEST LEADER FOR AMERICA WHICH HE HAS DECIDE TO SERVE ALSO AGAINST MANY DESTRUCTIVES FORCES,
HIS STANCE WILL DEAL WITH ISSUES THAT WON’T SWAY HIS ALLEGEANCE TO HIS ROLE
AS LEADER, AND HIS DISCIPLINE OF THE MILITARY EXPERIENCE WILL BALANCE EVEN MORE HIS DECISION ON URGENT ISSUES WHERE HE WONT BE PANICKING.
AMERICA DESERVE THE BEST IN LINE TO NURTURE HER, BECAUSE SHE HAD PAID THE ULTIMITE PRICE TO EARN IT
Michael Overfield,
How come you’re comment is not showing here at FA
you had many link on it,