Time to End "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

CrackerJax

CrackerJax

New Member
I'm for gay marriage and of course for gay rights.

I'm against open gays in the military.

Anything which disrupts the efficiency of our military is a NO GO.

The military has one goal.... winning wars, and that's it. It's not a place for social engineering.

It's counter productive..... end of story there.
 
MuyLocoNC

MuyLocoNC

Well-Known Member
fdd, there you go again trying to bring common sense and a regard for what is actually best for the military into a debate about a progressive agenda that has no concern for either.
 
F

fdd2blk

Well-Known Member
MuyLocoNC said:
fdd, there you go again trying to bring common sense and a regard for what is actually best for the military into a debate about a progressive agenda that has no concern for either.
Click to expand...
i just don't want to get butt raped when i drop the soap. :shock:


lolz


:hump::joint::joint:

we were at a bachelor party once. girl was on her hands and knees and had her spread cootchie in my buddies face. so he poked it with his finger. sometimes you just can't resist. :)
 
dukeofbaja

dukeofbaja

New Member
So, to sum this up....fdd2blk does not want to let willing soldiers serve because he is worried that he could possibly drop his soap while a gay soldier is watching, the gay soldier would then run up and penetrate his anal cavity, and he would be left crying in shame, as any self respecting soldier in the armed force would do. Two words for you....GET REAL!

MuyLocoNC, your opinion on what is best for the army flies in the face of what every one of your superior officers currently believe, including Gates, Mullen, and Obama. I would put all my money on them over you with respect to knowing what's best for our armed forces.

CrackerJax, you just stated more stuff which makes me less able to loathe your differing opinions. But still, why would you disagree with all of the top brass? They don't seem to think it would disrupt the efficiency of our armed forces, they think it would improve it. And social engineering? Hardly....more like trying to get more warm bodies on the battle field.
 
dukeofbaja

dukeofbaja

New Member
Oh, upnorth2505, I am VERY interested in hearing some of these anecdotes about the womens' messiness. Spill the beans! What disgusting shit are they doing!?
 
CrackerJax

CrackerJax

New Member
Because military cohesion is tantamount to a WINNING fighting force.

The military goes to great strains to scrub out the individual identity of recruits. It replaces the I with WE. It distills everything down to the corps.... the corps...the corps. It's about having and keeping a focus. being openly gay interrupts that focus.

Being openly gay introduces back into the recruits EROS. The military wants ETHOS. There is no place for EROS in the fighting portion of our military.

Our society is not military and our military isn't a society. It needs to be excluded form being PC.
 
F

fdd2blk

Well-Known Member
dukeofbaja said:
So, to sum this up....fdd2blk does not want to let willing soldiers serve because he is worried that he could possibly drop his soap while a gay soldier is watching, the gay soldier would then run up and penetrate his anal cavity, and he would be left crying in shame, as any self respecting soldier in the armed force would do. Two words for you....GET REAL!

MuyLocoNC, your opinion on what is best for the army flies in the face of what every one of your superior officers currently believe, including Gates, Mullen, and Obama. I would put all my money on them over you with respect to knowing what's best for our armed forces.

CrackerJax, you just stated more stuff which makes me less able to loathe your differing opinions. But still, why would you disagree with all of the top brass? They don't seem to think it would disrupt the efficiency of our armed forces, they think it would improve it. And social engineering? Hardly....more like trying to get more warm bodies on the battle field.
Click to expand...
that post was sarcasm. :dunce:

funny you chose to respond to that post and not my "real questions". :clap:
 
dukeofbaja

dukeofbaja

New Member
CrackerJax, I have to respect, if nothing else, the thought out reasoning behind your opinion. But your opinion continues to stand in the face of those who know best, like Gates, Mullen, and the commander in chief. Also, it contradicts what you previously stated, which is that you are for gay rights. But if you truly choose to believe what you do, in the face of all who know better, go ahead.

fdd2blk, what is your 'real question'? Because I haven't seen one. If you are referring to the 'why do men and women have separate restrooms?' question, I would say that is because gender and sexual preference are completely different things. A 4 year old knows that. Was that idiotic question, the one you continue to chant as if it were the trump card, your 'real question'?
 
F

fdd2blk

Well-Known Member
dukeofbaja said:
CrackerJax, I have to respect, if nothing else, the thought out reasoning behind your opinion. But your opinion continues to stand in the face of those who know best, like Gates, Mullen, and the commander in chief. Also, it contradicts what you previously stated, which is that you are for gay rights. But if you truly choose to believe what you do, in the face of all who know better, go ahead.

fdd2blk, what is your 'real question'? Because I haven't seen one. If you are referring to the 'why do men and women have separate restrooms?' question, I would say that is because gender and sexual preference are completely different things. A 4 year old knows that. Was that idiotic question, the one you continue to chant as if it were the trump card, your 'real question'?
Click to expand...
really? that's your answer? :-|


funny your opinion is based entirely on what others tell you.
 
CrackerJax

CrackerJax

New Member
dukeofbaja said:
CrackerJax, I have to respect, if nothing else, the thought out reasoning behind your opinion. But your opinion continues to stand in the face of those who know best, like Gates, Mullen, and the commander in chief. Also, it contradicts what you previously stated, which is that you are for gay rights. But if you truly choose to believe what you do, in the face of all who know better, go ahead.

fdd2blk, what is your 'real question'? Because I haven't seen one. If you are referring to the 'why do men and women have separate restrooms?' question, I would say that is because gender and sexual preference are completely different things. A 4 year old knows that. Was that idiotic question, the one you continue to chant as if it were the trump card, your 'real question'?
Click to expand...
Why does Gates and the rest know best? The historical feelings of the military say the opposite.

By the way... I hear this issue described many times as "military POLICY". It's not policy... it's the law. A law passed by a Democratically controlled Congress and signed by big Bill Clinton in 1993. It's very specific and straight (:lol:) forward.

Only Congress can change it ... no one else.
 
jeff f

jeff f

New Member
dukeofbaja said:
CrackerJax, I have to respect, if nothing else, the thought out reasoning behind your opinion. But your opinion continues to stand in the face of those who know best, like Gates, Mullen, and the commander in chief. Also, it contradicts what you previously stated, which is that you are for gay rights. But if you truly choose to believe what you do, in the face of all who know better, go ahead.

fdd2blk, what is your 'real question'? Because I haven't seen one. If you are referring to the 'why do men and women have separate restrooms?' question, I would say that is because gender and sexual preference are completely different things. A 4 year old knows that. Was that idiotic question, the one you continue to chant as if it were the trump card, your 'real question'?
Click to expand...
duke, your clueless as far as the military goes. the "know best" crowd your arguing with are political appointees. they HAVE to agree with the president. if not, they have no job period. they are there to support 100% the potus.

dont you remember general censcecchi (spellig not even close) who openly disagreed with rumsfeld? he was retired within a week.
 
F

fdd2blk

Well-Known Member
jeff f said:
duke, your clueless as far as the military goes. the "know best" crowd your arguing with are political appointees. they HAVE to agree with the president. if not, they have no job period. they are there to support 100% the potus.

dont you remember general censcecchi (spellig not even close) who openly disagreed with rumsfeld? he was retired within a week.
Click to expand...
he's running with the flock. he'll be fine. :-P
 
jesus of Cannabis

jesus of Cannabis

:-)
they bleed the same blood as the next guy or girl. Plus a boat load of dykes always me work more hours to stay away from them. If they want to serve let them serve, I thought/hoped we would be beyond this now as a country with bigger things to worry about.
 
F

fdd2blk

Well-Known Member
you feel the need to "tell" me you are gay, yet you have no desire to look at my penis. why the fuck do i care if you are gay? you're either shoving it in my face or not. which is it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top