Marines express concern over DADT repeal

Speaking of openly serving homosexuals, interviewed marines said, “They won’t hold up well in combat” and “Maybe they should just take the same route they take with females and stick them to noncombat units.” Oh dear, these Marines are clearly prime candidates for “re-education”.

From here (my emphasis):

But Private Carias, 18, has one major concern: gay men, he says, should not be allowed to serve in front-line combat units.

“They won’t hold up well in combat,” he said.

That view, or variations on it, was expressed repeatedly in interviews with Marines around this town, home to Camp Lejeune, and outside Camp Pendleton in Southern California on Sunday.

Most of the approximately two dozen Marines interviewed said they personally did not object to gay men or lesbians serving openly in the military. But many said that introducing the possibility of sexual tension into combat forces would be disruptive, an argument made by the commandant of the Marine Corps a week before the historic repeal was passed by the Senate on Saturday and sent to President Obama for his signature. ….

In the interviews, the Marines also argued that front-line units living in cramped outposts were encouraged to be extremely tight knit to better protect one another. An openly gay man — only men can serve in combat units — might feel out of place and as a result disrupt that cohesion, they argued.

“Coming from a combat unit, I know that in Afghanistan we’re packed in a sardine can,” said Cpl. Trevor Colbath, 22, a Pendleton-based Marine who returned from Afghanistan in August. “There’s no doubt in my mind that openly gay Marines can serve, it’s just different in a combat unit. Maybe they should just take the same route they take with females and stick them to noncombat units.”…..

“Showers will be awkward,” Private Tuck said outside a shopping mall here, expressing a worry mentioned by just about every Marine interviewed. “But as long as a guy can hold his own and protect my back, it won’t matter if he is gay.”

But a friend of Private Tuck’s injected a note of skepticism. “It won’t be totally accepted,” said Pvt. Justin Rea, 18, from Warren, Mich. “Being gay means you are kind of girly. The Marines are, you know, macho.”

Several combat commanders, all of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity because they had not been authorized to speak publicly on the issue, expressed concerns. An Army platoon sergeant who recently led front-line soldiers in Afghanistan, and who supported the ban’s repeal, said he envisioned a difficult transition period during which harassment of openly gay troops would be common.

“They were kicking people out for being homosexual, and now they will be kicking people out for picking on homosexuals,” the sergeant said.

Chaos and confusion unnecessarily injected into the military during wartime all because of a liberal addiction to half-witted, politically correct tomfoolery.

8 thoughts on “Marines express concern over DADT repeal

  1. Yawn. From the same article:

    Advocates for gay service members said questions about the ability of gay troops to serve in combat units were based on unfair and inaccurate stereotypes. Gay men already serve honorably and well in war-fighting units, they said, just not openly. Those same gay troops typically blend in to their units without tensions, they said, and anyone, straight or gay, can crumble emotionally during fighting.

    “The thought they would freak out, be unprepared or panic is completely belied by the facts that have come out during this debate,” said Alexander Nicholson, a former soldier who is executive director of Servicemembers United, an organization of gay and lesbian troops and veterans.

    Anthony Wilfert, 25, for instance, served a yearlong tour with an Army combat unit in Baghdad from 2005 to 2006. He was in firefights and knew colleagues who were wounded or killed. Several colleagues, including superiors, knew he was gay, he asserts. But no one had trouble with his sexuality in Iraq, he says, and he was promoted to sergeant. “No one feared that I would not be able to handle myself or be able to help other men and women on the battlefront,” said Mr. Wilfert, who lives in Nashville. Eventually, though, he was discharged under “don’t ask, don’t tell.” He said he was considering re-enlisting.

    If, in two or three years time you can start posting stuff that clearly shows that US military effectiveness has been compromised, I’ll eat my words. I don’t believe I will be eating my words.

      • Touche. My flimsy excuse is that I’m no longer bothering to argue for the validity of the repeal – I’ve already stated my opinion in that regard – but am addressing peripheral issues. Don’t forget the relish.

  2. P.S. When I get back to work after New Years, I’ll be working directly with a US Marine (colonel select) on a daily basis. Maybe I’ll share some of his perspectives.

  3. Warren,
    If you end up eating your words, it will signify the deterioration of the current world’s best military.
    Gays serve under DADT. What this does is inject social engineering into a finely balanced community that doesn’t want it and certainly doesn’t need it.
    I’m sure you will agree that the NCO’s are the backbone of any military and I expect that the first signs will be a wave of senior NCO’s electing retirement instead of re-upping. After all, Mullen has already given them their choice: lump it or leave.
    Peace,
    Jim

  4. Definitely the best equipped, Jim. Man for man – or woman for woman – I definitely don’t think you need to be ashamed of your own military. I agree about NCOs being the backbone.

  5. A thought popped into my mind about Warren’s new work mate. We had a training officer at Vimy who bragged about running the biggest Comm operation in Europe. The intake University Officer Cadets gushed over this man while those of us with TI (time in) wondered what he did so wrong to get stuck with 25 Officer Cadets.

    If I were this USMC Colonel I’d be wondering what superior I offended.

Leave a Reply