Hey, Elaine Donnelly!
moar funny pictures
The article in the upcoming issue of Joint Force Quarterly, which is published for the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was written by an Air Force colonel who studied the issue for months while a student at the National Defense University in Washington and who concludes that having openly gay troops in the ranks will not hurt combat readiness.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of Pentagon leaders, but their appearance in a publication billed as the Joint Chiefs’ “flagship’’ security studies journal signals that the top brass now welcomes a debate in the military over repealing the 1993 law that requires gays to hide their sexual orientation, according to several longtime observers of the charged debate over gays in the military.
While decisions on which articles to publish are made by the journal’s editorial board, located at the defense university, a senior military official said yesterday that the office of Admiral Mike Mullen, the Joint Chiefs chairman who is the nation’s top military officer, reviewed the article before it was published.
As many other nations’ military forces, such as Israel, Australia, and Canada, will show us, allowing homosexuals to serve openly in the ranks isn’t going to destroy the world as we know it. Personally, as an aside, I think this news holds more weight coming from an educated member of the military, someone who has been in the actual ranks, rather than that seeming know-it-all Elaine Donnelly (yeah, that one), whose military experience seems to be bossing military people around. But, back to the article:
“After a careful examination, there is no scientific evidence to support the claim that unit cohesion will be negatively affected if homosexuals serve openly,’’ writes Colonel Om Prakash, who is now working in the office of Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates. “Based on this research, it is not time for the administration to reexamine the issue; rather it is time for the administration to examine how to implement the repeal of the ban.’’
To quote Maud from the liked Shakesville thread:
Yes, Mr. President, you were saying . . . ? I can’t hear your fierce advocacy over the sound of a man of integrity making a simple, firm declarative statement.
The article goes on to say something that anyone w/ a working concept of basic math could have told you. DADT costs the military a Humvee full of money, and that, sure, there will be some disruptions, but there already are. The civilian world is full of the hatred and homobigotry already, where yelling “that’s so gay” is an appropriate insult it seems, or where I get a chortle from a family friend because I mention that saying someone is “faggalicious” in front of The Kid at dinner isn’t flying with me.
The military will deal with these things as they come. We need to give them room to do so, and trust the people who are actually inside the world’s largest organization to know how to handle it rather than some homobigot who has no idea what it is like to wear a uniform or what unit cohesion really means. The time to do this is long past. Job security and protection of livelihood should not have to come at the cost of living a lie. Ever.