Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Women in the military

Came from the "Classified information breach" thread.

I believe gays and women should be allowed in the military, in all roles, but have their own special units. I.E. instead of having a few guys and one girl and a gay dude, you have all the woman and gay men in one group. Lesbians would be with the males.

This is all to prevent fraternization among personnel so people are more focused on doing their job.

This arguement was already happening.....This thread is entirely pointless.

go go go isn't a very good way to start a discussion.

you should offer some views that people can at least use as a launching point for their own to compare to

Gold Spartan wrote:This arguement was already happening.....This thread is entirely pointless.

Well, this is so it goes in the right section, and the info breach can get back on topic.

Nocbl2 wrote:

Gold Spartan wrote:This arguement was already happening.....This thread is entirely pointless.

Well, this is so it goes in the right section, and the info breach can get back on topic.

......everyone calling it BS is back on topic?
Anyways, think of a better way to start a debate thread. Making other people start it for you is just plain lazy.

You do realize that putting gay men all in the same unit would create even more distraction than having a few gays interspersed within larger units, right?

That's stupid, I dont see why you would have to seperate gay men, or females. Sure there is a chance of them making stupid mistakes like Recon said, but for a larger military force, I think it's worth it.

Wait, so you are expecting men to be more focused on their job when they are amongst lesbians?

Gauz wrote:That's stupid, I dont see why you would have to seperate gay men, or females. Sure there is a chance of them making stupid mistakes like Recon said, but for a larger military force, I think it's worth it.

To be honest, when I made those arguments, I was speaking entirely from the perspective of an actual military officer. My reasons, as I said before, are entirely based on personal ethics, and I won't attempt to cover that up by presenting faulty arguments.

I don't like the idea of the United States sending young women out onto the battlefield. I think actual combat should be reserved for men. That's just how I think it should be.

ReconToaster wrote:

Gauz wrote:That's stupid, I dont see why you would have to seperate gay men, or females. Sure there is a chance of them making stupid mistakes like Recon said, but for a larger military force, I think it's worth it.

To be honest, when I made those arguments, I was speaking entirely from the perspective of an actual military officer. My reasons, as I said before, are entirely based on personal ethics, and I won't attempt to cover that up by presenting faulty arguments.

I don't like the idea of the United States sending young women out onto the battlefield. I think actual combat should be reserved for men. That's just how I think it should be.

Well, if women are just as willing to risk their necks for their country, why not let them?

Nocbl2 wrote:

ReconToaster wrote:

Gauz wrote:That's stupid, I dont see why you would have to seperate gay men, or females. Sure there is a chance of them making stupid mistakes like Recon said, but for a larger military force, I think it's worth it.

To be honest, when I made those arguments, I was speaking entirely from the perspective of an actual military officer. My reasons, as I said before, are entirely based on personal ethics, and I won't attempt to cover that up by presenting faulty arguments.

I don't like the idea of the United States sending young women out onto the battlefield. I think actual combat should be reserved for men. That's just how I think it should be.

Well, if women are just as willing to risk their necks for their country, why not let them?

because without women we have no more men to send at our enemies

Onyxknight wrote:

Nocbl2 wrote:

ReconToaster wrote:

Gauz wrote:That's stupid, I dont see why you would have to seperate gay men, or females. Sure there is a chance of them making stupid mistakes like Recon said, but for a larger military force, I think it's worth it.

To be honest, when I made those arguments, I was speaking entirely from the perspective of an actual military officer. My reasons, as I said before, are entirely based on personal ethics, and I won't attempt to cover that up by presenting faulty arguments.

I don't like the idea of the United States sending young women out onto the battlefield. I think actual combat should be reserved for men. That's just how I think it should be.

Well, if women are just as willing to risk their necks for their country, why not let them?

because without women we have no more men to send at our enemies

... Well, maybe we have a limit on how many people can join? Besides, most people don't want to risk their life, so...

Onyxknight wrote:

Nocbl2 wrote:

ReconToaster wrote:

Gauz wrote:That's stupid, I dont see why you would have to seperate gay men, or females. Sure there is a chance of them making stupid mistakes like Recon said, but for a larger military force, I think it's worth it.

To be honest, when I made those arguments, I was speaking entirely from the perspective of an actual military officer. My reasons, as I said before, are entirely based on personal ethics, and I won't attempt to cover that up by presenting faulty arguments.

I don't like the idea of the United States sending young women out onto the battlefield. I think actual combat should be reserved for men. That's just how I think it should be.

Well, if women are just as willing to risk their necks for their country, why not let them?

because without women we have no more men to send at our enemies

Not every single man is sent to war, why would it be different for women?

Nocbl2 wrote:

Onyxknight wrote:

Nocbl2 wrote:

ReconToaster wrote:

Gauz wrote:That's stupid, I dont see why you would have to seperate gay men, or females. Sure there is a chance of them making stupid mistakes like Recon said, but for a larger military force, I think it's worth it.

To be honest, when I made those arguments, I was speaking entirely from the perspective of an actual military officer. My reasons, as I said before, are entirely based on personal ethics, and I won't attempt to cover that up by presenting faulty arguments.

I don't like the idea of the United States sending young women out onto the battlefield. I think actual combat should be reserved for men. That's just how I think it should be.

Well, if women are just as willing to risk their necks for their country, why not let them?

because without women we have no more men to send at our enemies

... Well, maybe we have a limit on how many people can join? Besides, most people don't want to risk their life, so...

that is true but i still say men are made for the tough jobs so i think women should stay as support roles

Onyxknight wrote:

Nocbl2 wrote:

Onyxknight wrote:

Nocbl2 wrote:

ReconToaster wrote:

Gauz wrote:That's stupid, I dont see why you would have to seperate gay men, or females. Sure there is a chance of them making stupid mistakes like Recon said, but for a larger military force, I think it's worth it.

To be honest, when I made those arguments, I was speaking entirely from the perspective of an actual military officer. My reasons, as I said before, are entirely based on personal ethics, and I won't attempt to cover that up by presenting faulty arguments.

I don't like the idea of the United States sending young women out onto the battlefield. I think actual combat should be reserved for men. That's just how I think it should be.

Well, if women are just as willing to risk their necks for their country, why not let them?

because without women we have no more men to send at our enemies

... Well, maybe we have a limit on how many people can join? Besides, most people don't want to risk their life, so...

that is true but i still say men are made for the tough jobs so i think women should stay as support roles

They may be stronger, but if someone can actually pass training, I think they should be allowed to serve in a combat role.