Today's news has mentioned a number of times that Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, is stating that he'd rather that the Congress hold its horses with getting rid of DADT (Don't Ask Don't Tell)

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64R00I20100530?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews

WTF?  Where does a sitting military officer get off making political pronouncements like this?  I thought that the military heirarchy was supposed to more or less take a neutral stance (when making official statements) and let the political process, and their Commander-in-Chief, essentially give them their orders.

I tend to agree with Mullen but that is beside the point.  It seems to me that it is highly inappropriate for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs to be making political statements like this... especially when it appears that his statements run counter to the President's policy.

What say you? ???

(My question is not really about the gay issue... it is about military leaders taking partisan political positions in the public forum)

I don't know what military protocol is for this sort of thing, but I would guess it's more lenient for policies that directly affect personal life in the military.

Still, I think it's ridiculous that we make such a big deal out of gays serving, when you consider various other nations (like Canada) haven't had a problem with it.

When I was in the military BEFORE Don't Ask/Don't Tell, you WERE asked and if you told, you were out! Personally, I don't think DADT is any different than it was before because more than 12,500 have been discharged since the enactment.

One of the supervisors I had was gay. It is not like she said anything or did anything to let it be known but we all knew it. She also happened to have been the BEST supervisor I had in my entire AF career.

Gays have been serving in the military since the beginning of time. Most of the troops on the ground will tell you that it is no big deal. You will always find those homophobics who don't want them near them but that is their problem. 

As for Admiral Mullen making his statement, I think he is in his rights to make the statement he did-I think he is wrong in his assessment but he that is his right. Part of the duty of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs is to give his council to the prez whether he agrees or not. I wouldn't want someone in that position being a "yes man" especially if the prez wants to start an illegal war-but that is another story.



Cat

I wouldn't want someone in that position being a "yes man" .
Cat


I agree with you there, but I think he should be voicing his opinions behind closed doors.

As to DADT, something that seems odd to me is that apparently any number of gays have been thrown out not because they started "coming out", but because somebody who had a beef with them "ratted them out".  To me that would seem to violate the principal of DADT.

My opinion about gays in the military?  As long as they ( the guys that is) are not the effeminate flaming sissy type (think Liberace or Perez Hilton types), I'm OK with it.

I agree with you there, but I think he should be voicing his opinions behind closed doors.



I see your point but I disagree. I think everyone has the right to state their opinion on the record.



As to DADT, something that seems odd to me is that apparently any number of gays have been thrown out not because they started "coming out", but because somebody who had a beef with them "ratted them out".  To me that would seem to violate the principal of DADT.



EXACTLY!!!! That is why DADT is totally WRONG!!!!



My opinion about gays in the military?  As long as they ( the guys that is) are not the effeminate flaming sissy type (think Liberace or Perez Hilton types), I'm OK with it.


Most "sissy types" as you put it wouldn't join.



Cat

I happen take the opposite stance on the issue from yours: there've been gay dudes in the military for hundreds of years, it's just that most of the straight dudes fighting alongside them didn't know it, and/or didn't care.  As a straight civilian, there have been many co-workers whom I'd have happily boinked.  But because I'm professional enough not to poop where I eat (even when I was part of the dating pool!), I remained oblivious to them, and they remained oblivious of me.  ("Don't care, don't tell!" :)

But as you say, that's not the issue here:


(My question is not really about the gay issue... it is about military leaders taking partisan political positions in the public forum)


Karma for realizing the real issue: if there is to remain civilian control of the military, officers (especially those at the JCS level!) oughta know when, and how, to voice their concerns without disrupting the chain of command.  If the commander-in-chief says "jump", and Congress passes a law that repeals the prohibition against him saying "jump", the only response is "how fabulously?"

It lets me know the military can't be that hard up for recruits. 

Now, if they reinstate the draft, every kid is going to start showing up in a pink tutu singing Ethel Merman.  DADT ain't gonna work.
::)

Looks like they lifted the ban a while ago.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=haHXgFU7qNI

;D ;D

To begin, Mullen is also against DADT.  Second, the law is explicit that the review being conducted by the pentagon must be completed BEFORE any action is taken.  Third, the Prez, Gates, and Mullen must all agree that the process will not disrupt the military, so what Mullen said was no big deal.  Last, as a citizen, he has the right to speak out.

To begin, Mullen is also against DADT.  Second, the law is explicit that the review being conducted by the pentagon must be completed BEFORE any action is taken.  Third, the Prez, Gates, and Mullen must all agree that the process will not disrupt the military, so what Mullen said was no big deal.  Last, as a citizen, he has the right to speak out.


I sort of wonder what would happen to one of Mullens' subordinates if he called a press conference to point out that he disagreed with Mullens' position on DADT.  My guess is that he'd be peeling potatos for the duration.