67% of combat USMC troops say gays in mil will hurt combat effectiveness

[megimoo]

67 Percent of Marine Combat Forces Say Putting Homosexuals in Their Units Will Hurt Their Effectiveness in the Field, Says DOD Report

- 66.5 percent of U.S. Marine combat forces surveyed by a special Defense Department working group said that putting homosexuals in their units would hurt their effectiveness in the field, and 47.8 percent of Marines in combat units specifically said putting homosexuals in their units would hurt their effectiveness “in an intense combat situation.”

The U.S. Congress voted last week to repeal the law—commonly known as Don’t Ask, Don’ Tell—that barred homosexuals from serving in the military.

Earlier this year, after President Barack Obama said in his 2010 State of the Union Address that he wanted to end the ban on homosexuals in the military, Defense Secretary Robert Gates put together a special working group to begin making plans for integrating homosexuals into the Armed Forces if Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell were in fact repealed.

The working group secured the services of Westat Corporation, a polling company, to survey more than 115,000 active duty service members on their attitudes and views about integrating homosexuals into the military. Among those surveyed by Westat were 989 men serving in Marine combat units.

..................

Last week, before Congress voted to lift the ban on homosexuals in the military, Gen. James Amos, the commandant of the Marines, told reporters that he opposed lifting the ban because of what he had heard from Marines about it.

"The forces that wear this uniform, that are in the middle of what I call the real deal, came back and told their commandant of the Marine Corps they have concerns," Gen. Amos told the reporters. "That's all I need. I don't need a staff study. I don't need to hire three PhDs to tell me what to interpret it," he said. "If they have concerns, I do, too. It's as simple as that."

Gen. Amos said the distraction of having homosexuals in the ranks could cost Marines their lives. “Mistakes and inattention or distractions cost Marines lives. That’s the currency of this fight,” said Gen. Amos. “I don’t want to lose any Marines to the distraction. I don’t want to have any Marines that I’m visiting at Bethesda [National Naval Medical Center] with no legs be the result of any type of distraction.”


http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/...orces-say-putt

[Kay]

"The forces that wear this uniform, that are in the middle of what I call the real deal, came back and told their commandant of the Marine Corps they have concerns," Gen. Amos told the reporters. "That's all I need. I don't need a staff study. I don't need to hire three PhDs to tell me what to interpret it," he said. "If they have concerns, I do, too. It's as simple as that."

Well said Gen. Amos.

[Phillygirl]

Why the title? SDJ isn't a member here or, as far as I know, at DU.

[PoliCon]

Why the title? SDJ isn't a member here or, as far as I know, at DU.

The idiot did another copy past from Free Republic without reading it.

[Rockntractor]

The idiot did another copy past from Free Republic without reading it.

Do you have a comment on the topic?

[megimoo]

Why the title? SDJ isn't a member here or, as far as I know, at DU.

As you well know NU !

[megimoo]

The idiot did another copy past from Free Republic without reading it.

Who are you calling an idiot Gladys and Just who in hell do you think you are.You have no standing to moderate this board so sod off imbecile !

[PoliCon]

Do you have a comment on the topic?

My comments are as on topic as his threads.

[megimoo]

My comments are as on topic as his threads.

Do you have any idea who SDJ is you idiot ?A few on the board do and it was for them that I mentioned the name .

[Novaheart]

Well said Gen. Amos.

You really think so? What if 66.5% of marines thought that shutting down operations in Afghanistan was a good idea? Would General Amos then endorse that idea?

See, I've seen this statement about the survey in about a dozen articles, and people like you cheering it on, but I haven't seen anything supporting the position. Don't we usually expect a position to have some support? None of these articles say, "67% of marines oppose ending DADT, half of whom claim that having gay men in combat units would reduce effectiveness because gay men aren't as good at firing weapons, gay men are notorious cowards in battle, and gay men like to have Saturdays off."

No, these articles are basically saying that the marines surveyed thing THEY will be a problem, that THEY will harm effectiveness. See, when YOU are going to be less effective if I am there, then YOU are the problem, not me. Got it?