Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Did Pentagon Distort ĎDonít Ask, Donít Tellí Survey Results?
Pajamas Media ^ | December 3, 2010 | Dan Miller

Posted on 12/03/2010 12:26:24 PM PST by DanMiller

An actual read-through of the results shows much greater combat troop opposition to repeal than the initial public statements would have you believe.

According to an early media report of the just released Pentagon study on elimination of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT) it was recognized that it “might cause some disruption at first but would not create widespread or long-lasting problems.” In the absence of any explanation of “some disruptions,” “at first,” and “widespread or long-lasting,” and the lack of reference in that assertion to combat effectiveness, that is not entirely comforting.

Some top leaders of the military have recommended that the current limitations on homosexuals serving in the military be abolished, claiming that it would not unduly impair military effectiveness. However, the Pentagon study of the matter leaves substantial doubt as to that conclusion’s veracity. My doubts are principally as to the impact on combat effectiveness. Unless armed combat has vanished as the principal role of the military and the concept of “boots on the ground” has become obsolete, that is important.

The principal function of the military has historically been to kill people and to break things. That is a function of combat troops, and rear echelon, non-combat troops don’t do much of it. President Obama’s recent remarks to the West Point graduating class about his vision of the future of the military, as commented upon in National Review, seemingly disregard this.

Based largely on the survey described above [in the article], the chiefs of the Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, and Army disagree with the report’s conclusion that the impact on combat readiness would be “low.” Senator McCain seems to be leading the charge.

(Excerpt) Read more at pajamasmedia.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: combat; dadt; dod; military
President Obama's remarks on the day the Report was released also suggest that he neither knows nor cares much about combat effectiveness:

As Commander in Chief, I have pledged to repeal the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law because it weakens our national security, diminishes our military readiness, and violates fundamental American principles of fairness and equality by preventing patriotic Americans who are gay from serving openly in our armed forces. At the same time, as Commander in Chief, I am committed to ensuring that we understand the implications of this transition, and maintain good order and discipline within our military ranks. That is why I directed the Department of Defense earlier this year to begin preparing for a transition to a new policy.
. . . .
With our nation at war and so many Americans serving on the front lines, our troops and their families deserve the certainty that can only come when an act of Congress ends this discriminatory policy once and for all. The House of Representatives has already passed the necessary legislation. Today I call on the Senate to act as soon as possible so I can sign this repeal into law this year and ensure that Americans who are willing to risk their lives for their country are treated fairly and equally.
President Obama did not mention why it is essential to him that DADT be repealed by the present Congress; that has long been obvious and there was no need to explain his motivations. It is, however, significant that he drew no distinction between combat troops and non-combat troops and seemed to have disregarded even the overall predominance of negative over positive views as to military effectiveness.
1 posted on 12/03/2010 12:26:29 PM PST by DanMiller
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: DanMiller

Hey, why not? This government has lied to us about pretty much everything else, haven’t they??


2 posted on 12/03/2010 12:35:28 PM PST by cld51860
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DanMiller
Did Pentagon distort ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ survey results?

Some questions just answer themselves.


3 posted on 12/03/2010 12:35:54 PM PST by Iron Munro (This is our culture; fight for it. This is our flag; pick it up. This is our country; take it back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DanMiller

“Did Pentagon Distort ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Survey Results?”

It’s almost as if someone’s professional career depended on it.


4 posted on 12/03/2010 12:45:24 PM PST by Spok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DanMiller
Apparently, the survey replies were not anonymous. A member of the military who received one pointed out that anyone who didn't answer as "expected", could expect to be assigned to weeks of "sensitivity" training as a "reward" for being honest. The results aren't honest because the method of collection of responses was rigged.
5 posted on 12/03/2010 12:58:43 PM PST by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Myrddin

Are you Serious?? They were NOT ANONYMOUS???? OMG!!


6 posted on 12/03/2010 1:05:46 PM PST by Ann Archy (Abortion......the Human Sacrifice to the god of Convenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DanMiller

I’m in the military and I really don’t know anyone who SUPPORTS this crap.

My take is if they are going to do this we might as well just go 100% co-ed. Put the men and women together in all things. Same showers, rooms, and everything. If it’s ok for a couple of fags to get assigned the same room or for one fag to checkout other men why not just mix everything in one big old pot. Just like Starship troopers.


7 posted on 12/03/2010 1:46:05 PM PST by for-q-clinton (If at first you don't succeed keep on sucking until you do succeed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DanMiller

I heard that they included those on “separate rats” [separate rations], who are normally NCOs and married personnel living off base.

I heard that the questions tended to be something like, “would having a gay person in your unit disrupt your living situation ???”

Which, would not be a problem for these people - but their responses get lumped in with the junior personnel WHO WOULD have to be “bunk-buddies” with the gays ...

All this skews the results - if taken alone [by those who WOULD be affected], the percentage AGAINST is waaay over 50% ...


8 posted on 12/03/2010 2:04:54 PM PST by Lmo56 (If ya wanna run with the big dawgs - ya gotta learn to piss in the tall grass</i><p>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Spok

And their names are Adm.Mikey Mullen— and Sec.Def. Robert Gates.Gates -having done his dirty work for this President is retiring where he can kill himself with alcohol telling lies
about what a Patriot he was when Sec.Def. Mullen it seems also lacks the character manifested in that Navyman who committed suicide a few years back when he found he had been wearing service ribbons he had not earned.He earned my respect -not for the suicide—but because he was more honorable than either Gates or Mullen as I see it today.


9 posted on 12/03/2010 2:10:36 PM PST by StonyBurk (ring)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Lmo56

As did the fact that everybody in leadership position told the troops nothing would be done until they had the input of the men and women in uniform— then the brass ass monkeys went ahead and proceeded to prove they had lied to ranks because
everything was proceeding as planned— without any response from the ranks. What CONTEMPT Sec.Gates— and Adm.Mullen— and their phony CIC have for those who serve.


10 posted on 12/03/2010 2:14:50 PM PST by StonyBurk (ring)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson