04-05-2016, 09:56 PM
(04-05-2016, 08:58 PM)michaelsean Wrote: But the army is also a political machine so the top may not always make decisions based on what is actually best.
And I'm not just talking this incident. Matt is expressing concerns about the loss of rights, and all 3 guys who voluntarily accepted that are saying it's necessary. It has nothing to do wirh being punitive because thwy can, but rather because ir's a job unlike any other. Other people have dangerous jobs, but none of them have a job in which killing people and destroying things is their primary duty. No other job is comparable in the least. Cops have to kill people on occasion, but that's not their job.
I was against gays in the military because I believed it could cause some issues in close quarters. Then just about every military person I knew said they couldn't care less. I figured if it doesn't bother them then it doesn't bother me.
The people I know in the service currently have not had any problem with this, including three officers that knew Singh at the USMA and one who graduated the year before Singh arrived. I know of only one person currently in the military that is against this, but he referred to Singh as a "sand ******," so it is what it is. Everyone has opinions on this sort of thing.
