Quote:
Originally Posted by Broadsword2004
What really was interesting was that General who was a Special Forces officer course graduate, but openly homosexual? One thing I am wondering is, all of you QPs on here mention about the problems that homosexuals in the military would cause (or do cause), but this man spent 40+ years in the military, but says the military members are professional enough to deal with this.
My question (as an outsider) is, why would he say this, if so many other combat soldiers claim otherwise? I'd imagine say for things like showers, or say for checking for ticks in private areas out in the field, and other such things, that being gay would cause problems unforseeable (for example might be bad if a Private became sexually attracted to his Sergeant or something).
Also, from what I understand from reading multiple conversations between military members (including here), when women were forced on the military, that it caused a lot of problems that the military hadn't forseen. If members of the military were not professional enough to stop problems from happening resulting from women (which many of which weren't even the women's fault from what I've read, they just were unforscene results of women being in the military), what would make this General think that such problems would not happen with openly homosexual people allowed into the military?
|
This has NOTHING to do with "Fred Thompson for President" and screams of a personal agenda. 
Eagle
__________________
Primum non Nocere
"I have hung out in dangerous places a lot over the years, from combat zones to biker bars, and it is the weak, the unaware, or those looking for it, that usually find trouble.
Ain't no one getting out of this world alive. All you can do is try to have some choice in the way you go. Prepare yourself (and your affairs), and when your number is up, die on your feet fighting rather than on your knees. And make the SOBs pay dearly."
The Reaper-3 Sep 04
|