Glock Talk

Glock Talk (http://glocktalk.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Furball Forum (http://glocktalk.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=201)
-   -   Army general is military's first openly gay flag officer (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1437117)

Bren 08-11-2012 16:31

Army general is military's first openly gay flag officer
 
This is not really a political issue, or an Army issue - more of a social issue thing I guess, so I'm going to try GNG as a forum for it.

Army general is military's first openly gay flag officer

The interesting thing isn't that they made her a general and let her "wife" pin on her stars - that would be in keeping with Army policy . . . if you could make general in your first year.

The interesting part is, she has been in the Army for 26 years. More than 19 years ago, she had to state in writing that she was not a homosexual in order to join and I believe she may have had to lie about it again on her security clearance documents throughout the years. Even during Don't Ask Don't Tell, she was in violation for actually having a girlfriend/wife/whatever she calls her. DADT only stopped them from asking, it remained a UCMJ violation to have sex with a person of the same sex.

So that decided to ignore violations o fthe past - but does that wipe out an entire career of lying to the Army and violating regulations, to make her a general?

If she was straight and had a DUI as a captain, she probably wouldn't even be in the Army right now.

Kilrain 08-11-2012 16:36

Being that she's a gay flag officer, does her car have little rainbow flags on the front fenders when she's driven around?

:dunno:

Ummagumma 08-11-2012 16:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bren (Post 19296842)
This is not really a political issue, or an Army issue - more of a social issue thing I guess, so I'm going to try GNG as a forum for it.

Army general is military's first openly gay flag officer

The interesting thing isn't that they made her a general and let her "wife" pin on her stars - that would be in keeping with Army policy . . . if you could make general in your first year.

The interesting part is, she has been in the Army for 26 years. More than 19 years ago, she had to state in writing that she was not a homosexual in order to join and I believe she may have had to lie about it again on her security clearance documents throughout the years. Even during Don't Ask Don't Tell, she was in violation for actually having a girlfriend/wife/whatever she calls her. DADT only stopped them from asking, it remained a UCMJ violation to have sex with a person of the same sex.

So that decided to ignore violations o fthe past - but does that wipe out an entire career of lying to the Army and violating regulations, to make her a general?

If she was straight and had a DUI as a captain, she probably wouldn't even be in the Army right now.

It's not like she's lied about her qualifications or having a prior criminal record. She lied under a policy of discrimination that 40 years from now would appear no different than "No colored people" policies do now. She shouldn't have been put in this situation in the first place.

Caver 60 08-11-2012 17:33

I know of at least three full bull Colonels who received UCMJ punishment for adultery. One case happened within the last year or so. I don't see any reason she should be given an exemption for her violations. I'm on Bren's side on this one.

Restless28 08-11-2012 18:25

What would McArthur, Patton, Bradley, Nimitz, Sgt. York and Audie Murphy think of this crap?

bunk22 08-11-2012 18:26

Yet she looks so hetero! Whew...

kiole 08-11-2012 18:29

How would you feel if she was Jewish and there was a policy against Jews serving? Then years later the discriminative policy was eliminated. Would you think her hiding her religion was justified?

faawrenchbndr 08-11-2012 18:30

Well,.....she looks like a dude, guess she is on top?

Ummagumma 08-11-2012 18:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caver 60 (Post 19297023)
I know of at least three full bull Colonels who received UCMJ punishment for adultery. One case happened within the last year or so. I don't see any reason she should be given an exemption for her violations. I'm on Bren's side on this one.

What's the UCMJ definition of adultery ? Seriously, I've got no idea. Were they married and fooling around ? Or were they unmarried and had a girlfriend ?

Are all UCMJ personnel prohibited by having a relationship with other UCMJ personnel, even if neither is married ?

fireguy129 08-11-2012 18:53

Anyone surprised? Really??

davew83 08-11-2012 18:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Restless28 (Post 19297182)
What would McArthur, Patton, Bradley, Nimitz, Sgt. York and Audie Murphy think of this crap?

Probably would worry more about the work they do than who they sleep with.

SPIN2010 08-11-2012 19:01

Right on the money, Bren.

Just more proof we are in the time of what is right is wrong and what is wrong is right.

Fact: A lying CIC or a lying general, whats the difference? No agency is enforcing the law on criminals and the american people have no power over their leaders to do so anymore.

Big Bird 08-11-2012 19:08

The real question is was she promoted because of her sexuality or in spite of it?

Regardless...promotion party following the ceremony to be held at the "Don't ask don't tell club."

KalashniKEV 08-11-2012 19:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bren (Post 19296842)
The interesting part is, she has been in the Army for 26 years. More than 19 years ago, she had to state in writing that she was not a homosexual in order to join and I believe she may have had to lie about it again on her security clearance documents throughout the years.

WOW... just wow... :wow:

Did you equate concealing her sexuality prior to DADT to getting tanked and taking the party on the road?

INTERESTING indeed... (your comment)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bren (Post 19296842)
Even during Don't Ask Don't Tell, she was in violation for actually having a girlfriend/wife/whatever she calls her. DADT only stopped them from asking, it remained a UCMJ violation to have sex with a person of the same sex.

Have you not violated Article 125? Because I did routinely...

I guess it's a good thing I'll never be a General.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bren (Post 19296842)

So that decided to ignore violations o fthe past - but does that wipe out an entire career of lying to the Army and violating regulations, to make her a general?

If you were a runaway slave, your record was clean after the Emancipation.

If you were a top performer in service to Nation, serving under a backward policy that was later reversed, your record is similarly clean whether you're a General officer or an E-4 for life.

I'm really surprised by your shameful comment. You should slap the **** out of yourself and edit the OP, IMO. :shocked:

ChuteTheMall 08-11-2012 19:26

Quote:

Army general is military's first openly gay flag officer
I see you spelled flag correctly.

:aodnsb:

And yeah, if she lied to get her security clearance, she needs to be prosecuted. It's a matter of national security, not a sex club.

:pjmn:

zoyter2 08-11-2012 19:27

I think people are avoiding the REAL issue and dodging what NEEDS TO BE SAID........................



















Congratulations on your promotion and thank you for your service General Smith. :patriot:

KalashniKEV 08-11-2012 19:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by zoyter2 (Post 19297399)
Congratulations on your promotion and thank you for your service General Smith. :patriot:

x1000

This is a historic moment in the history of the United States Army and should be celebrated, but really, congratulations to BG Smith!!

The age of Radical Christian Moralism is over in this country. Our culture has progressed.

No longer do we have THE FIRST AMERICAN FEMALE ASTRONAUT living in shame of her sexuality, and in secret. No longer do we have General Officers living lives of service- contrary to the policies of their organizations.

We can celebrate the WHOLE HERO now... and that's a very good thing!

:salute:

bigleaf 08-11-2012 19:41

It seems that her work over her career was exceptional to the point that she was promoted again, and again, and again until she was among the highest leaders in our Army.

You've got to remember... In response to a set of discriminatory, unjust and un-American regulations against a large number of their fellow soldiers, the Armed Forces has ignored sexual orientation for decades. They didn't much talk about it. Soldiers did their jobs. Soldiers got promoted according to how well they did their jobs. They even got Congress and Pres. Clinton to codify it with "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", while those unjust regs were heading out the door for good.

Here's the test for government recognition of marriage or equal treatment under the law, or any right of any American: Is this a right of a citizen? Is she a citizen? If yes, and yes, then yes.

Congratulations to General Smith, and to our Army for truly reflecting our citizenry.

Detectorist 08-11-2012 19:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bren (Post 19296842)
This is not really a political issue, or an Army issue - more of a social issue thing I guess, so I'm going to try GNG as a forum for it.

Army general is military's first openly gay flag officer

The interesting thing isn't that they made her a general and let her "wife" pin on her stars - that would be in keeping with Army policy . . . if you could make general in your first year.

The interesting part is, she has been in the Army for 26 years. More than 19 years ago, she had to state in writing that she was not a homosexual in order to join and I believe she may have had to lie about it again on her security clearance documents throughout the years. Even during Don't Ask Don't Tell, she was in violation for actually having a girlfriend/wife/whatever she calls her. DADT only stopped them from asking, it remained a UCMJ violation to have sex with a person of the same sex.

So that decided to ignore violations o fthe past - but does that wipe out an entire career of lying to the Army and violating regulations, to make her a general?

If she was straight and had a DUI as a captain, she probably wouldn't even be in the Army right now.

I agree 100%

Having served on active duty in the Reserve Personnel Center, I've seen it time and time again.

For example: back then the Officer regulations stated that if you fail certain career courses you must be discharged. I've seen a female officer fail twice and nothing happened to her. On top of that, I was threatened with disciplinary action of I looked into it further.

boby 08-11-2012 19:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Restless28 (Post 19297182)
What would McArthur, Patton, Bradley, Nimitz, Sgt. York and Audie Murphy think of this crap?

Who cares what a bunch of dead guys think?


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:43.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2013, Glock Talk, All Rights Reserved.