Srebrenica gay theory irks Dutch

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-30-2009
Srebrenica gay theory irks Dutch
63
Fri, 03-19-2010 - 1:36am

What a complete and utter idiot! What a horrific insult to all gay soldiers worldwide.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-28-2009
Fri, 03-19-2010 - 6:15am

>>"It is astonishing that a man of his stature can utter such complete nonsense," ><

I agree!

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-01-2010
Sat, 03-20-2010 - 1:00am

>>> He said Dutch leaders had told him that the presence of gay soldiers had contributed to the Bosnian massacre.

The Dutch leaders either told him this or not. It seems unlikely that a man of his stature would just make something like this up.

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-30-2009
Sat, 03-20-2010 - 3:47am
Not so much "astonishing" as highly despicable and deeply insulting ALL troops.

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-30-2009
Sat, 03-20-2010 - 4:21am

The Dutch leaders either told him this or not.


They most certainly did not!


It seems unlikely that a man of his stature would just make something like this up.


Yet he did.

Even "a man of his stature" can be homo-fobic. That fact can't be news to you, can it?

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-28-2009
Sat, 03-20-2010 - 9:26am
It's unfortunate that he is already retired so they can't boot his butt out of the service for being a despicable human being.
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-10-2008
Sat, 03-20-2010 - 10:26am
Wasn't he commander? Then it is his responsibility. As area(whatever) commander it is his responsibility to place the troops under his authority wisely. Yes European troops for the main part are not combat soldiers. Or at least at that time. I have no idea what they are now with some combat experience. You cannot expect untried(green) troops to act like veterans. Worse "peace" keeping forces many time have a very restrictive Rules Of Engagement which may preclude intervention under many circumstances. Rwanda for instance.
xvra
Hornycomments.com for myspace adult comments
iVillage Member
Registered: 02-01-2010
Sat, 03-20-2010 - 6:40pm

<< The Dutch leaders either told him this or not.

>>> They most certainly did not!

You really have to appreciate the ability some folks have to mind-read...

>>> It seems unlikely that a man of his stature would just make something like this up.

>>> Yet he did.

...or use a ouija board.

>>> Even "a man of his stature" can be homo-fobic. That fact can't be news to you, can it?

That a man of his stature "can" be...no, that wouldn't be news...that this particular man "is"...well, we'll need more than mind-reading and ouija boards to prove that one, won't we?

>>> Sheehan obviously opposes lifting DADT, which is his democratic right.
But doing so, he actually says that he doesn't "mind" if gay soldiers are doing the fighting (and dying) under his command, as long as he doesn't know they are gay.

Right...he believes that having openly gay soldiers in the military will cause fundamental problems...and he's probably right.

>>> What is he thinking (if at all) re this 'issue' anyway? Does he believe "openly gay" soldiers suddenly sport pink poppies in their hair/helmets or something?

I believe that there are military regs regarding dress and hairstyle, so while there may be a noticeable "swish" in their marching gate, I don't think that "pink poppies" will be a significant problem.

>>> Does he believe that gay soldiers don't possess the urge of defending and fighting for their country?

Obviously he does...which is why he apparently has no problem having them in his units. He would just be appreciative of their discretion.

Why, in his opinion, would gay soldiers join the army at all?

To be all they can be?...except openly gay, of course.

>>> Would he even allow gay people to defend their country, once he knows they are gay?

What "he" knows isn't the issue...it's having an "openly gay" policy that he feels will be detrimental to the military.

>>> What is the "gain" if gay people hide who they are as soon as they join the army?

"Who they are?" Who they "are" are soldiers. They can keep who they'd like to bugger to themselves...like everyone else should. It should be "don't ask don't tell" for everyone.

>>> Most pressing IMO re this 'issue': Does he blame any US military failures on (obviously present but under the condition of DADT) gay soldiers as well?

He didn't say that...but how would he know...our soldiers aren't supposed to be openly gay, so it would only be an assumption on his part. Besides, any military failures have been foisted on the US by liberals who hamper them from doing their jobs.

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-30-2009
Sun, 03-21-2010 - 1:27am
"he believes that having openly gay soldiers in the military will cause fundamental problems...and he's probably right."

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-28-2010
Sun, 03-21-2010 - 1:51am

I agree with you.

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-14-2010
Sun, 03-21-2010 - 2:14am

"I agree with you.

Pages