In this case, there have been gays in the military for years. Rightist blindness prevents them from acknowledging that. So waht is Hunter really getting at?
Via RawStory, the Huck's prospective Secretary of Defense shares his pearls of wisdom:
The US military does too much hard fighting to "experiment" with allowing gays to openly serve in uniform, according to dark horse GOP presidential contender Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA).
Appearing in a 60 Minutes segment focused on the apparently waning enforcement of the US military's 15-year-old "don't ask, don't tell" policy as it struggles to retain service personnel, Hunter said that the American armed services couldn't afford to mimic the fighting forces of European nations, which let gays serve.
"We aren't the Brits, we're not the Europeans, we're not the Swedes," said Hunter, citing other forces that permit gays in uniform. "The Fallujahs of the world, the Ramadis of the world that require heavy combat and lots of firefighting capability -- those are the places the Americans go."
As for the other nations, Hunter suggested their forces had it a bit easier.
"The other countries tend to go to the so-called peacekeeper zones, where they have fewer firefights and less contact with the enemy," he said. "And the European nations show little will to send large contingents of their military people into dangerous places."
But, on the contrary, Admiral Sir Alan West, the former head of the British Royal Navy, said that the 2000 decision to let gays serve openly actually improved the effectiveness of England's forces.
"I don't believe for a second it's affected the fighting capability of our forces," said West. "I think it is better. Because people feel they can be open about who they are, and they can really throw themselves totally into what they want to achieve with your force."
He went on to say that American and British definitions of machismo differed.
"I think American troops are very brave and I think British troops are very brave, but we do it in a little bit of probably a quieter way generally," he said. "We don't know have to...shave our heads off and shake hands very hard. You can still kill someone without having to do that...you read about the Spartans, they were all homosexuals, the whole lot of them -- and I don't think anyone would suggest for a second that the 500 Spartans fighting against the Persian army were not pretty macho."
Hunter, however, warned that with the US military only recently beginning to meet recruitment goals, it was no time to adopt new policy.
"When we risk doing away with this system that works, where American families sit around the dinner table and they make a decision that their young men or young woman is going to go into this military because they share the values of that military?" asked Hunter. "Or should we experiment at a time when our military is totally volunteer, when it's extremely capable, and perhaps lose that capability or perhaps lose those numbers, perhaps lose those reenlistments, and perhaps lose that effectiveness?"
No comments:
Post a Comment