Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-13-2012, 12:42   #241
gwalchmai
Lucky Member
 
gwalchmai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Outside the perimeter
Posts: 46,282


Quote:
Originally Posted by OctoberRust View Post
The argument has long been over, ever since kalishnakev and FN fal man ended it with citations and facts.


Sorry your team lost, take it like a man, and maybe even throw in an apology. If you're confused on any of this, refer back to the last few pages.


ETA - if you want the rules to be the "rules" then we should can 90%+ of the military for giving or receiving oral.
Well, no, not really. The real truth is that PC promotions and Affirmative Action always result in lowered standards and a weaker military. Many of us see that and are saddened by it.

So yeah, my team lost.
gwalchmai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2012, 12:51   #242
Peace Warrior
CLM Number 221
Am Yisrael Chai
 
Peace Warrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: With the other 7,999,999
Posts: 28,380
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by OctoberRust View Post
UCMJ article 125 leaves it open for interpretation it seems. So basically almost everyone in the military is guilty to begin with, and subject to punishment whenever they see fit.

Anyways, it's all or nothing gay bashers. Come on.
gay bashers? Ummmm... yeah.


I don't bash homosexuals, and as I mentioned before, if a heterosexual woman lied in order to receive a commission, would that be okay with you?
__________________
“After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it.” - William S. Burroughs
"Nothing we're gonna do is going to fundamentally alter or eliminate the possibility of another mass shooting or guarantee that [our gun ban legislation] will bring gun deaths down..." - VPOTUS Joe Biden
"Love 'Em All!!! Let Jehovah sort 'em out." - The Holy Bible
"It's a lot simpler to fool people than it is to convince them they've been fooled."
Peace Warrior is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2012, 13:00   #243
fnfalman
Chicks Dig It
 
fnfalman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: California & New Mexico, US
Posts: 57,728


Quote:
Originally Posted by Peace Warrior View Post
I don't bash homosexuals, and as I mentioned before, if a heterosexual woman lied in order to receive a commission, would that be okay with you?
Officers and enlisted lie all the times, some lies are big and some lies are small. However, all the lies violate the UCMJ codes and code of conducts. So...now what?
__________________
Can you dig it?
fnfalman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2012, 13:03   #244
nmk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,184
Quote:
Originally Posted by OctoberRust View Post
The argument has long been over, ever since kalishnakev and FN fal man ended it with citations and facts.


Sorry your team lost, take it like a man, and maybe even throw in an apology. If you're confused on any of this, refer back to the last few pages.


ETA - if you want the rules to be the "rules" then we should can 90%+ of the military for giving or receiving oral.
Only 90%? I think you're being pretty conservative with that figure. Maybe someone will come along to tell us how natural it is...



ETA: Sorry, I missed the +.

Last edited by nmk; 08-13-2012 at 13:03..
nmk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2012, 13:17   #245
John Rambo
Raven
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Tampa, Fl.
Posts: 9,216
Quote:
“I don’t think I need to be focused on that," Stripes quoted Smith as saying. "What is relevant is upholding Army values and the responsibility this carries.”
Thats why shes a General and you're all keyboard kommandos.
John Rambo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2012, 13:18   #246
Glock13
Senior Member
 
Glock13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Eglin AFB
Posts: 2,678
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bren View Post
NO. The answer is pretty obvious - the medal of honor is given for specific acts and has nothing to do with the soldier's career, before or after.

Promotion, on the other hand, is based on the whole career. If this general had 20 years in and joined during Don't Ask Don't Tell, that would be perfectly legitimate. I'd suspect the promotion, or the surrounding publicity, was political and was being used to motivate a particular voting base at this particular time (a group that is small but has a lot of influence in the media) but there wouldn't be the same question.

In this case, the Army has chosen to promote an officer to general who has made it clear that she has lied to the Army, her superiors, subordinates, etc., throughout her careeer.



Maybe and maybe not - it probably isn't in her military records that the senate reviews. I don't know how much outside investigation is done. Prior to this administration, any actual mention in her records that she was a lesbian would have been cause to throw her out of the Army.
That is a nice way to twist it. However, if the MOH recipient was honest, he may never have been able to join in the first place. Like you said, this is all about lying.
__________________
PUTTING WARHEADS ON FOREHEADS...

Last edited by Glock13; 08-13-2012 at 13:20..
Glock13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2012, 13:30   #247
ChuteTheMall
HildabeastHater
 
ChuteTheMall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Anti-Obamaville
Posts: 61,696


Quote:
Originally Posted by Peace Warrior View Post
Not so fast, we are still waiting on the unnatural carnal copulation definition.
If it's genetically determined, how can it be unnatural?
ChuteTheMall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2012, 13:32   #248
OctoberRust
Anti-Federalist
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,642
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmk View Post
Only 90%? I think you're being pretty conservative with that figure. Maybe someone will come along to tell us how natural it is...



ETA: Sorry, I missed the +.

Well, the other 10% are lying.

I just left that tid-bit of information out.
OctoberRust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2012, 13:33   #249
OctoberRust
Anti-Federalist
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,642
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwalchmai View Post
Well, no, not really. The real truth is that PC promotions and Affirmative Action always result in lowered standards and a weaker military. Many of us see that and are saddened by it.

So yeah, my team lost.

Affirmative action?


Wow, you should look up that definition.

Yea, I'm saddened by affirmative action too, two wrongs don't make a right.
OctoberRust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2012, 14:05   #250
Lampshade
Senior Member
 
Lampshade's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,470
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peace Warrior View Post
I don't bash homosexuals...
You just make reference to their supposed desire to destroy the institution of the family and point to, as evidence, a supposed 'homosexual manifesto.'

Lampshade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2012, 14:09   #251
KalashniKEV
Senior Member
 
KalashniKEV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NoVA
Posts: 5,790
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peace Warrior View Post
(Personally, I hold Officers to a higher standard than Enlisted personnel.)
What about haircuts? The higher the fade, the higher the standard, right?

And shouldn't Lieutenants be allowed to have sideburns? I mean come on... give 'em something...

(j/k... there's only one standard... THE ARMY STANDARD. It doesn't matter what you have on your collar)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peace Warrior View Post
Not so fast, we are still waiting on the unnatural carnal copulation definition.
No, we're not... you must have missed the last few pages.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OctoberRust View Post
UCMJ article 125 leaves it open for interpretation it seems.
No... it's not. Read post #121 or click my lmgtfy link and read the first reference.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Rambo View Post
Thats why shes a General and you're all keyboard kommandos.
/thread.
KalashniKEV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2012, 14:34   #252
OctoberRust
Anti-Federalist
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,642
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lampshade View Post
You just make reference to their supposed desire to destroy the institution of the family and point to, as evidence, a supposed 'homosexual manifesto.'


Zing!
OctoberRust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2012, 14:42   #253
OctoberRust
Anti-Federalist
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,642
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwalchmai View Post
Well, no, not really. The real truth is that PC promotions and Affirmative Action always result in lowered standards and a weaker military. Many of us see that and are saddened by it.

So yeah, my team lost.

Yea, just pulled up the text now.

(a) Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration, however slight, is sufficient
to complete the offense.

Hmmm, so oral isn't natural.

I think you should man up and apologize for the ignorant posts you and Chute have put into this thread. I'm not holding my breath though, integrity here is next to non-existent.
OctoberRust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2012, 15:24   #254
fnfalman
Chicks Dig It
 
fnfalman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: California & New Mexico, US
Posts: 57,728


What about ring knockers getting promoted before others? It's been going on for ages now, so which part of Affirmative Action/Political Correctness is that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by napp32 View Post
Sadly, that was (is?) true in some cases. When Affirmative Action was first instituted, the services jumped through the hoops in an effort to level the playing field as quickly as possible. There was a period when the field was over-tilted beyond level; and things were more "affirmative" than they should have been.

It's just a fact of life that military promotions at the upper echelons have always been influenced, to a degree, by politics. It's equally true that non-whites being considered for higher ranks in the early days of Affirmative Action reaped the benefits of "being in the right place at the right time."

I've been retired too long to know if the same situation still exists; but I suspect it is less of an issue now than it was during the seventies.
__________________
Can you dig it?
fnfalman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2012, 15:42   #255
napp32
Senior Member
 
napp32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,640
Quote:
Originally Posted by fnfalman View Post
What about ring knockers getting promoted before others? It's been going on for ages now, so which part of Affirmative Action/Political Correctness is that?
Read my post that you quoted again. Nowhere did I use the term Political Correctness. The ring knocker example you mentioned was/is a big part of the political process. No doubt about that. However, it can hardly be compared with Political Correctness. It is more closely related to the "good ol' boy" syndrome in local politics.
__________________
Hope and Hype....There is a difference.
napp32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2012, 16:07   #256
engineer151515
_______________
 
engineer151515's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 20,883


Quote:
Originally Posted by fireguy129 View Post
Anyone surprised? Really??


In an age when Nobel Prizes are handed out for doing absolutely nothing, no. I am not.
__________________
"...dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal." - Abraham Lincoln, Gettysburg Address
engineer151515 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2012, 17:08   #257
Fox
Varmit Control
 
Fox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 8,210
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Bird View Post
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."
This is a political general put on the fast track of promotion by the Obama Administration.

The Left is cementing their power by taking over more of the establishment.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

Last edited by Fox; 08-13-2012 at 17:09..
Fox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2012, 17:23   #258
nmk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,184
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox View Post
This is a political general put on the fast track of promotion by the Obama Administration.

The Left is cementing their power by taking over more of the establishment.
Any evidence to back this up?
nmk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2012, 17:24   #259
Paul7
New Guy
 
Paul7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: East of Eden
Posts: 13,842
Nice precedent here, military personel only have to follow orders they agree with.
__________________
“I don’t believe that people should be able to own guns.” Obama to John R. Lott Jr. in a private conversation at the University of Chicago.
Paul7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2012, 17:26   #260
Fox
Varmit Control
 
Fox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 8,210
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmk View Post
Any evidence to back this up?
How about the fact that her qualification for the post is that she is an open homosexual?

Yes, it's a major accomplishment for the Obama administration to have made a lesbian into a general.

Again, the far left has been taking over the establishment. The Saul Alinsky playbook is to destroy from within. It's all about "fundamentaly changing America", A culture war.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

Last edited by Fox; 08-13-2012 at 17:34..
Fox is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 14:51.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,057
281 Members
776 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31