[Gunnair]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

Andy likes this new policy as he's been fucking the dog for years.

[Unsound]

andyt andyt:

Guess that means the US will be full of unmotivated fucks the way the Canadian forces are now.

Dude... really? I have nowhere near the antipathy towards you that some here seem to have, in fact I often kinda sorta agree with some of the things you say. But this is just a stupid thing to say. Neither accurate nor pertinent to the discussion.

[Freakinoldguy]

andyt andyt:

Guess that means the US will be full of unmotivated fucks the way the Canadian forces are now.

But that wasn't actually my question. Do you think it's true that 30% of women serving in the US military are raped?

WTF.

When you can post a service # on this board, then, you can speak with impunity, but, until you do I suggest you STFU about things you know next to nothing about.

That was the most ignorant piece of flat faced civie crap I've heard since the sixties.

So, I guess here's the 64 thousand dollar question. Were you having another flashback when you typed that?

[andyt]

Unsound Unsound:

andyt andyt:

Guess that means the US will be full of unmotivated fucks the way the Canadian forces are now.

Dude... really? I have nowhere near the antipathy towards you that some here seem to have, in fact I often kinda sorta agree with some of the things you say. But this is just a stupid thing to say. Neither accurate nor pertinent to the discussion.

Read Bart's post, to which I was replying. According to him, gays in the military leads to unmotivated soldiers only joining up. Canada has had gays in the military for how many years now? Ergo, by Bart's logic, the Canadian forces must already be full of unmotivated soldiers in it only for the benefits.

But it doesn't surprise me that that people don't follow the argument, just jump on what I said. Guess he didn't get it either.

If you still don't get it, it was a refutation of Bart's argument.

Plus I figured I owed Penetrator one for dragging me into a topic that had nothing to do with me. Wouldn't have even commented otherwise.

[andyt]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

And if it were the case then how would making the military open the door to sexual deviants improve this situation?

Much less likely to rape women.

[Tricks]

andyt andyt:

Unsound Unsound:

andyt andyt:

Guess that means the US will be full of unmotivated fucks the way the Canadian forces are now.

Dude... really? I have nowhere near the antipathy towards you that some here seem to have, in fact I often kinda sorta agree with some of the things you say. But this is just a stupid thing to say. Neither accurate nor pertinent to the discussion.

Read Bart's post, to which I was replying. According to him, gays in the military leads to unmotivated soldiers only joining up. Canada has had gays in the military for how many years now? Ergo, by Bart's logic, the Canadian forces must already be full of unmotivated soldiers in it only for the benefits.

But it doesn't surprise me that that people don't follow the argument, just jump on what I said. Guess he didn't get it either.

If you still don't get it, it was a refutation of Bart's argument.

Plus I figured I owed Penetrator one for dragging me into a topic that had nothing to do with me. Wouldn't have even commented otherwise.

The Canadian Military demographic is also a lot different than the American one. But why let fact stand inthe way of making a stupid comment?

[andyt]

Tricks Tricks:

andyt andyt:

Unsound Unsound:

Dude... really? I have nowhere near the antipathy towards you that some here seem to have, in fact I often kinda sorta agree with some of the things you say. But this is just a stupid thing to say. Neither accurate nor pertinent to the discussion.

Read Bart's post, to which I was replying. According to him, gays in the military leads to unmotivated soldiers only joining up. Canada has had gays in the military for how many years now? Ergo, by Bart's logic, the Canadian forces must already be full of unmotivated soldiers in it only for the benefits.

But it doesn't surprise me that that people don't follow the argument, just jump on what I said. Guess he didn't get it either.

If you still don't get it, it was a refutation of Bart's argument.

Plus I figured I owed Penetrator one for dragging me into a topic that had nothing to do with me. Wouldn't have even commented otherwise.

The Canadian Military demographic is also a lot different than the American one. But why let fact stand inthe way of making a stupid comment?[/quote]

So you actually agree with Bart's argument?

[Tricks]

andyt andyt:

So you actually agree with Bart's argument?

Part of it. Will something like this dissuade the typically religious people from enlisting? Probably. Does that mean they will all be lazy, doubt it.

But that also has nothing to do with you being a fuck hole again. Because Canada=/= America.

[Gunnair]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

andyt andyt:

Actually Bart, if you read this I'd like to get your take on it, since you were there. I found it pretty shocking.

My take is that the open door policy for queers decimated the ranks of NCOs and we're also losing recruitment figures among (Catholic) Hispanics and (Baptist) blacks because, predictably, the church-going families of young men don't want them in the company of queers.

This act to make it legal to hump whatever will serve to fuel more resistance to recruitment in the very segments of society that the military depends upon anymore.

The core of the volunteer military (NCO staff) is principally composed of patriotic, white, Southern and mid-Western Christians followed by Catholic, family-oriented Hispanics, and then blacks who tend to run very traditional in their faiths.

Now they're going to stay away from the military.

Were it not for the recession I think numbers would be down seriously right now, but where this will hurt is in five years (maybe less) as the ranks of career military NCO staff erodes. We're also going to see effects on readiness and combat effectiveness as the balance in the military changes from people who fight for 'God and Country' to people who join the military because it's a paycheck, it comes with benefits, and you can get some college money out of it.

People in that latter group are a mother****er to motivate in combat unless you get them to buy into unit cohesion and that's hard to do because these people question all such organizations all the time.

Yes, I know this is what the world is coming to but the fact of the matter remains that open-minded, tolerant, question-authority types make sh*tty soliders when orders are given to kill people. They make great corpsmen, mind you, but crappy killers.

In sum, when I was recently offered a full bird if I'd go back for eight more years I emphatically said no. And I am not at all unique.

Thanks for turning down the offer, the US military is better for it. Homophobes and bigots aren't generally likable traits in senior leaders.

Fortunately, I've met a lot of senior US NCM sailors (fleet leaders not just petty officers and chiefs) much more professional and mature than you.

[Gunnair]

andyt andyt:

Unsound Unsound:

andyt andyt:

Guess that means the US will be full of unmotivated fucks the way the Canadian forces are now.

Dude... really? I have nowhere near the antipathy towards you that some here seem to have, in fact I often kinda sorta agree with some of the things you say. But this is just a stupid thing to say. Neither accurate nor pertinent to the discussion.

Read Bart's post, to which I was replying. According to him, gays in the military leads to unmotivated soldiers only joining up. Canada has had gays in the military for how many years now? Ergo, by Bart's logic, the Canadian forces must already be full of unmotivated soldiers in it only for the benefits.

But it doesn't surprise me that that people don't follow the argument, just jump on what I said. Guess he didn't get it either.

If you still don't get it, it was a refutation of Bart's argument.

Plus I figured I owed Penetrator one for dragging me into a topic that had nothing to do with me. Wouldn't have even commented otherwise.

I find your response a bit ham-fisted, Andy, but I admit I knee jerked since I usually just skim through Bart's homophobic drivel.

My apologies for knee jerking and I take back my comments.

[Gunnair]

Tricks Tricks:

andyt andyt:

So you actually agree with Bart's argument?

Part of it. Will something like this dissuade the typically religious people from enlisting? Probably. Does that mean they will all be lazy, doubt it.

But that also has nothing to do with you being a fuck hole again. Because Canada=/= America.

Bart's argument ignores the fact that gays have been in the US military for years under the don't ask don't tell policy. His argument also misses out in my opinion because many of the senior noncom leaders I've talked to are quite open to having gays openly serving in the military. Bart's experience is likely different since his circle of buddies likely share his homophobic leanings.

[Tricks]

Gunnair Gunnair:

Tricks Tricks:

andyt andyt:

So you actually agree with Bart's argument?

Part of it. Will something like this dissuade the typically religious people from enlisting? Probably. Does that mean they will all be lazy, doubt it.

But that also has nothing to do with you being a fuck hole again. Because Canada=/= America.

Bart's argument ignores the fact that gays have been in the US military for years under the don't ask don't tell policy. His argument also misses out in my opinion because many of the senior noncom leaders I've talked to are quite open to having gays openly serving in the military. Bart's experience is likely different since his circle of buddies likely share his homophobic leanings.

I'd say that's fair, but I do think that the policy will dissuade people with homophobic leanings to give it a second thought, that's not unreasonable. Saying the military is going to go to shit is a load though.

[raydan]

Tricks Tricks:

I'd say that's fair, but I do think that the policy will dissuade people with homophobic leanings to give it a second thought...

...and that's a bad thing?

[Tricks]

raydan raydan:

Tricks Tricks:

I'd say that's fair, but I do think that the policy will dissuade people with homophobic leanings to give it a second thought...

...and that's a bad thing?

Nope, hence why I said the military going to shit is a load of crap.

[raydan]

Sorry Tricks... I WAS kinda surprised.