“Why do you think they have been trying to socially reform the military with gays in the military and women in combat? They know that if it comes to the thin red line between soldiers defending liberty and the constitution and killing and imprisoning fellow citizens the soldiers will stand with the citizen.”
There is no reason to believe that Gay people and women wouldn’t defend the Constitution. I would be more worried about the legions of gang-bangers and foreign nationals who are serving.
I once argued with a friend about the military takeover of America. I pointed out to him that as a percentage of population the Police and military are small. A certain percent of them wouldn’t go along with the scheme anyway. Add that to the millions of firearms and the rather large population of ex-military who are staunch defenders of the Republic in this country and you have a recipe for defeat.
They could control the urban areas but the more forceful and arrogant they become the greater the level of resistance they would engender which would lead to their ultimate downfall. The revenge a betrayed populace would exact would be horrific.
They will probably engineer a medical emergency instead.
They simply don’t belong in the military. People who need their personal sexual lifestyle to be gratified publicly regardless of what type of sexual peculiar lifestyle they lead suggests they are unfit. It isn’t about whether they can serve admirably. That wasn’t my point, my point is that gay activism is just a way to mold the military and intimidate and soften it. Gays who keep their private lives private are not as much an issue to me. It is the leftist social activism and the false idea that homosexuality is normal. Very many cases of gay rape occur in the military but go unreported. Just as occurs in the public space.
Open homosexuality should not be endorsed or accepted in the military one because it is a behavior that is even more disease ridden than typical promiscuous behavior. Also members of the same sex living in close quarters should not be threatened with same sex attentions is what open homosexuality means in the military. A friend of mine related a story where he came upon an officer raping a subordinate male. Gay males are sexually aggressive and allowing them to openly serve will only increase this and increase the exposure to health risks associated with such populations.
They have a great tendency to take advantage of their positions to abuse others. This is far greater than the norm. We’ve seen this in the priesthood, we’ve seen this in teachers, we’ve seen this in police officers, and foster parents. Certainly heterosexuals do molest but homosexuals make heterosexuals look like pikers. Part of this is because so many of them have been molested themselves. Even Rock Hudson was abused when he was 9 and if you don’t find this you will find far too often that a older male has groomed an underling. This is not something we need in the military. They have enough crap and clap already.
The Hungarian Revolution of 1956 is instructive.