Guns and ammo sales spark jobs boom

[callmeslick]

and, that should have read 'Navarre"

[Soapy]

Barfly, by your logic, women should be ruled out before gays, yet have functioned in the Israel army for decades. Agree on Navarro.....

Yes, in combat units intended for direct action, they aren't used in the Israeli army. Per experience with mixed gender units in '48.

True, to an extent, however in the Arab wars and even to this day women serve in that army, and if push came to shove, they are on the reserve list the same as men are.

Also pre 1948, in the Soviet Army women fought as tankers and pilots ,and in small unit actions as infantry too. In fact historically, when manpower was an issue, women have fought alongside men. The ancient Celts had no issue with it.

As to "Gay" soldiers, well the Greek Phalanx depended on it for unit cohesion.

I think that men whom, in a military or war scenario can't think with their brains, but instead think with their dicks is a bigger problem than gays or women serving.

Added to that, some of the people who have been decorated with the highest military honours, have been gay, and in some cases female. Personally I think macho tough guys are more of liability if they are bothered about a gay person or a woman standing next to them in the firing line.

[Soapy]

Oh and no offence to Barfly, but have you served in your armed forces in a conflict ? Reason I ask is I have lots of US friends who have, who would love more women/gays/people to actually serve, instead of people who didn't, but seem to blow a lot of hot air about it

[Reservoir_Dog]

Well said, Soapy.
Very well said.

[Barfly]

Barfly, by your logic, women should be ruled out before gays, yet have functioned in the Israel army for decades. Agree on Navarro.....

Yes, in combat units intended for direct action, they aren't used in the Israeli army. Per experience with mixed gender units in '48.

True, to an extent, however in the Arab wars and even to this day women serve in that army, and if push came to shove, they are on the reserve list the same as men are.

Also pre 1948, in the Soviet Army women fought as tankers and pilots ,and in small unit actions as infantry too. In fact historically, when manpower was an issue, women have fought alongside men. The ancient Celts had no issue with it.

As to "Gay" soldiers, well the Greek Phalanx depended on it for unit cohesion.

I think that men whom, in a military or war scenario can't think with their brains, but instead think with their dicks is a bigger problem than gays or women serving.

Added to that, some of the people who have been decorated with the highest military honours, have been gay, and in some cases female. Personally I think macho tough guys are more of liability if they are bothered about a gay person or a woman standing next to them in the firing line.

I understand the need to fill slots with bodies in a national survival scenario, like the perpetual state of alert Israel exists in, but they still don't intend on using mixed combat units if they don't have to. All hands in an emergency of course, but that's not really the US experience and isn't necessary here.

[Barfly]

Oh and no offence to Barfly, but have you served in your armed forces in a conflict ? Reason I ask is I have lots of US friends who have, who would love more women/gays/people to actually serve, instead of people who didn't, but seem to blow a lot of hot air about it

None taken. I'm ex-USAF, never been shot at as far as I know; worked with and know many individuals from different branches of the US military. We don't have a shortage of volunteers, so there's no need to accommodate alternate lifestyles or women in combat units. I personally have no problem with 'don't ask don't tell', but that's as far as it goes.

[callmeslick]

you realize, Barfly that 'don't ask, don't tell' led to a wholesale loss of a big chunk of our interpreters and other specialists back in the early 2000's when we really needed, say, Arabic interpreters.

[Barfly]

you realize, Barfly that 'don't ask, don't tell' led to a wholesale loss of a big chunk of our interpreters and other specialists back in the early 2000's when we really needed, say, Arabic interpreters.

I've never heard that, and don't believe it.

[callmeslick]

from one report, the REASON why interpreters were hit especially hard. We have been chronically short on Arabic interpreters in particular for over 15 years, and yet kept dismissing them, even after 9/11, merely for being openly gay. Not a bright defense strategy.....the text:
"the training school for linguists was much more liberal about gays than the actual service branches, which led to them being outed much more frequently since they didn't expect that DADT was actually enforced:
... The bulk of these men and women came from the Defense Language Institute, an elite training school for military linguists. DLI is a "joint service institution," run by the army but serving members from all military branches. Its campus sits on a hill in Monterey, California, peering over the rocky cliffs that tumble down to the Pacific Ocean. The school teaches 80 percent of the government's foreign language classes, with 1,000 faculty members serving 3,800 students. Because of the battery of entrance tests and the intensity of its courses, it is known to attract students who are older and more skilled than most enlisted personnel.

DLI also seems to attract a large share of gay students. "There were way too many gay people at DLI for anybody to fear the 'don't ask, don't tell' policy," said Alistair Gamble, a gay student who arrived at DLI in 2001. While there, he was out the all his gay peers and to any enlisted personnel who seemed gay-friendly. "Nobody cared," he explained. "I knew someone who was a flaming queen in uniform, and nobody cared. Sometimes we lived on halls that were more than 50 percent homosexual. I never even got a sideways glance."

[Barfly]

from one report, the REASON why interpreters were hit especially hard. We have been chronically short on Arabic interpreters in particular for over 15 years, and yet kept dismissing them, even after 9/11, merely for being openly gay. Not a bright defense strategy.....the text:
"the training school for linguists was much more liberal about gays than the actual service branches, which led to them being outed much more frequently since they didn't expect that DADT was actually enforced:
... The bulk of these men and women came from the Defense Language Institute, an elite training school for military linguists. DLI is a "joint service institution," run by the army but serving members from all military branches. Its campus sits on a hill in Monterey, California, peering over the rocky cliffs that tumble down to the Pacific Ocean. The school teaches 80 percent of the government's foreign language classes, with 1,000 faculty members serving 3,800 students. Because of the battery of entrance tests and the intensity of its courses, it is known to attract students who are older and more skilled than most enlisted personnel.

DLI also seems to attract a large share of gay students. "There were way too many gay people at DLI for anybody to fear the 'don't ask, don't tell' policy," said Alistair Gamble, a gay student who arrived at DLI in 2001. While there, he was out the all his gay peers and to any enlisted personnel who seemed gay-friendly. "Nobody cared," he explained. "I knew someone who was a flaming queen in uniform, and nobody cared. Sometimes we lived on halls that were more than 50 percent homosexual. I never even got a sideways glance."

How does your 'evidence' represent a 'wholesale loss' of interpreters due to being openly gay... it doesn't.