Gen. Pace...

Look, you're the one that needs to catch up


Gonz said:
source please.
Click to expand...

Already posted them.

We should eliminate the bigotry
Click to expand...

Ahhh, by eliminate the bigotry I meant eliminate the practice of not allowing openly gay folks to serve in the military. That has nothing to do with censorship.

...and it's not encouraging anyone to shut up either.

Pay attention.

By the way, "source please" for your claim of Pelosi lowering military standards.
 
Yet, there are those who find discrimination (which is seldom a bad thing), with reason, a plus. Since you may not understand, are you able to judge?


This is a return to tradition?

The US military has stopped battalion commanders from dismissing new recruits for drug abuse, alcohol, poor fitness and pregnancy in an attempt to halt the rising attrition rate in an army under growing strain as a result of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Last month it emerged that one recruiter gave advice on how to cheat a mandatory drug test to a potential would-be soldier who said he had a drug problem.

In another incident in Texas, a recruiter threatened a 20-year-old man with arrest if he did not turn up to an interview.

Pentagon has decided to make up the difference by expanding the pool—by letting up to 10 percent of new recruits be young men and women who have neither graduated high school nor earned a General Equivalency Diploma.

More than that, the Los Angeles Times reports today that 4 percent of recruits will be allowed to score as low as in the 16th to 30th percentile—a grouping known as "Category IV"—on the U.S. Armed Forces' mental-aptitude exam.

Now while you complain about Pelosi lowering standards you give no examples of how when asked.

I give a bunch of examples of how Bush has clearly lowered the standards and you make excuses and call it a "return to tradition".

You are so firmly in denial it's amazing.
Click to expand...
spike said:
Already posted them
Click to expand...
Maybe I'm missing it...source?
 
Gonz said:
Yet, there are those who find discrimination (which is seldom a bad thing), with reason, a plus. Since you may not understand, are you able to judge?
Click to expand...

Since they are not able to understand they should not judge. So go ahead and tell me the reason for the discrimination.

By the way, "source please" for your claim of Pelosi lowering military standards.
 
well, i must say your style has improved much Spike :) - but i still don't see why you or your protagonists need be quite so confrontational to the degree that any intelligent debate or good honest but well meant flames go out of the window .... ?(

just seems like pointless dogmatism on both sides -

try a mere modicum of respect for each other - perchance you'll get better debate, more fun and even the better flame! :D

best all, BB
 
We seem to have two different problems here.

First & foremost...provide a source for your material. Something as simple as "from the previous links" would suffice. As an administrator, if I ask, you need to provide or remove. Otherwise, you are in violation of the AUP.

Secondly, you said I said Pelosi did, or did not do, something. I referred to the left in general, in lowering the standards of military conditioning. Since we don't have time to go thru the entire 8 years of Clintons slashing of the military budget nor the history of the US military service, let it suffice that since the 1970s, the physical demands on recruits has been substantially reduced. That is, I'm sure, easily verifiable. I'm using my recollection of a number of stories, and personal experience, regarding this.
 
Gonz said:
First & foremost...provide a source for your material. Something as simple as "from the previous links" would suffice. As an administrator, if I ask, you need to provide or remove. Otherwise, you are in violation of the AUP.
Click to expand...

Source provided before you even asked. Just making yourself look silly and incompetent as an administrator when you don't read the info you asked for and can't back up any of your own claims.
 
Posts #'s in front of questions you avoided...

#18 Why would it make someone nervous?

#18 Do you mean the current system makes gays nervous about being found out?

#31 Now you want to expand on what standards Pelosi(or the left) is responsible for lowering ("some stuff has been lowered since 71" really doesn't cut it)

#31 What does Bush's psuedo service has to do with anything?

#40 Who did you prove wrong now? What's this have to do with anything?


Here's another one. You said....

isn't it always better that one can freely express their beliefs, no matter how un-PC they may appear? Isn't that the point of free expression?
Click to expand...

Now explain how it's not hypocrisy for you to want gays serving in the military not to be able to express their beliefs no matter how un-PC they are?
 
They can express any goddamed thing they wish to express. However, when they know the rules & break them, they should not bitch. There is no rule about espousing homosexuality. There are rules against practicing it.

18-I don't knw. I'm not homosexual
18-It shouldn't.

31-answered

One last time...your beliefs of what bigotry is & what what bigotry really is are not the same. You have approximately half the story.
 
Gonz said:
There is no rule about espousing homosexuality. There are rules against practicing it.
Click to expand...

Wrong...remember the "Don't tell" part of the rule?

They can express any goddamed thing they wish to express. However, when they know the rules & break them, they should not bitch.
Click to expand...

The rules need to be change so as not to encourage government sponsored bigotry. Of course they should bitch.

That's like saying "There's rules against blacks using this washroom if they break the rules they should not bitch". :rolleyes:

18-I don't knw. I'm not homosexual
Click to expand...

Then why did you say it? You admit having no point.

18-It shouldn't.
Click to expand...

You're right. They should be able to express themselves no matter how un-PC.

31-answered
Click to expand...

Where?

One last time...your beliefs of what bigotry is & what what bigotry really is are not the same. You have approximately half the story.
Click to expand...

I have the full story and you approve of half of it.

And you missed a couple questions yet again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top