May 11, 2014

World War T, Part MCCIX

From the NYT:
Hagel ‘Open’ to Review of Military Policy on Transgender People 
By HELENE COOPER MAY 11, 2014 
WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said on Sunday that the military should “continually” review its prohibition on transgender people serving in the armed forces, calling into question whether the Pentagon’s ban may eventually be lifted, as was the ban on gay men and lesbians in the military. 
While such a reversal appears to be far in the future — the Pentagon’s stock talking points on the issue have been that it is under continuous review — Mr. Hagel, appearing on ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday, pronounced himself “open” to a review of the policy and added, “Every qualified American who wants to serve our country should have an opportunity if they fit the qualifications and can do it.”
 
Stop snickering, this is serious stuff. In the near future, you could lose your job if you aren't properly submissive on this burning issue.
       

22 comments:

Mr. Anon said...

"Stop snickering, this is serious stuff. In the near future, you could lose your job if you aren't properly submissive on this burning issue."

Not to mention that the nation may be overrun, if some enemy launches a sneak-attack on Judy Garland's birthday.

Anonymous said...

Old soldiers never die. They just put on a dress.

Reg Cæsar said...

They shouldn't be barred-- they should be drafted.

If you've got minefields to clear and bombs to defuse, don't send fathers. Don't send fathers-to-be. Send fruits.

Anonymous said...

If indeed Libs really wanna make the US military more progressive, shouldn't they politically empower soldiers to participate in the debate about which wars to fight?

When US is attacked, there's no time for debate since it's about national defense.
But when US must fight wars far away from home where US is not endangered, shouldn't soldiers have a right to voice their opinions and vote to decide whether US fights or not? Shouldn't they have the right to opt out of wars they vehemently oppose or see as immoral?

After all, they signed on to defend the nation and to fight for the US, not to fight for interests abroad. Why should US soldiers fight wars for Israel or lose their lives over some fuzzily argued 'humanitarian mission'?

Since soldiers must kill, get killed, maim others, get maimed, and even kill lots of civilians, shouldn't they have a voice if they must commit great violence against other nations?

But US soldiers, straight or homo, must shut up and do as told. How progressive and democratic is that? And since elites don't have their own kids fight and die in wars, why should they decide on which wars to fight? So many politicians and rich folks never served in the military, but they get to decide which nations US must fight. Is that fair?

THAT is the true injustice, but there is no talk of that. Soldiers must still be pawns in the game of Jewish oligarchs.
But hey, maybe we can all fool ourselves that the US military is 'progressive' if we serve gourmet food to soldiers, offer them free plastic surgery, fill their ranks with homos and trannies.

It's libertarian trashiness meets big government military-industrial-complexism.



Reg Cæsar said...

OT on other thread, but fits right in here. One more time, Bobby Lopez's iSteveish headline:

The International Gay War on Black People Continues

The Z Blog said...

The 2nd Battalion, 1st Tranny Division should make for some laughs.

Anonymous said...

Given that American soldiers didn't fight in any of Israel's wars and given that of the many wars American has fought, since WW2, the only one that Israel could have conceivably benefited from is the Iraq war your "pawns in the game of Jewish oligarchs" claim seems pretty farfetched. The invasion of Iraq, itself, had multiple causes and reducing it to a question of Jewish interest is simplistic at best.

Anonymous said...

"the only one that Israel could have conceivably benefited from is the Iraq war"

The neocon plan was for many, many wars in the region including Syria and Iran. The only reason they didn't happen was because the US got so bogged down in Iraq and Afg.

The current potential war in Ukraine is mostly a temper tantrum over not being able to cause the same amount of havoc and misery in Syria as they caused in Iraq.

Anonymous said...

"The neocon plan was for many, many wars in the region including Syria and Iran. The only reason they didn't happen was because the US got so bogged down in Iraq and Afg."

It's not just 'neocon'. Liberal Jews control the media and Obama, and they've pushed policies that did to Syria and Libya what happened to Iraq. Though US didn't invade Syria, it's now a mess like Iraq. A total war zone where Muslims fight Muslims.
And Libya, another mess where Muslims fight Muslims.

Neocons did it stupidly. Liberal Zionists used Obama to do it smarter. Don't invade. Just support the rebels so that nations like Syria will tear themselves apart.


Anonymous said...

It all begins in grade school. By the time they reach military age, anything will be welcomed and acceptable:

FATHER ARRESTED & CUFFED at School Board Meeting For Protesting Pornographic Kid’s Book (Video)

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/05/father-arrested-cuffed-at-school-board-meeting-for-protesting-pornographic-kids-book-video/

No one said a word or did anything. They simply watched as he was dragged away.

Mr. Anon said...

Right - Now let's see something decent, and military:

Some Precision Drilling

Mr. Anon said...

"Anonymous said...

It all begins in grade school. By the time they reach military age, anything will be welcomed and acceptable:

FATHER ARRESTED & CUFFED at School Board Meeting For Protesting Pornographic Kid’s Book (Video)"

Thanks for bringing this to our attention. Truly outrageous. Interesting that the original story was in the Daily Mail, not from an american news outlet.

Anononymous said...

FATHER ARRESTED & CUFFED at School Board Meeting For Protesting Pornographic Kid’s Book

LOL, it's a book about a school shooting, but it's inappropriate reading for middle-schoolers because it has a sex scene and 'foul language'.

Anonymous said...

Bradley Manning was let join and we all saw how well that went.

Anonymous said...

Have you ever seen the film of Michael Frayne's excellent 'Privates on Parade'? - it concerns the travails of a British colonial army 'concert party' in Malaya - and the bitch-fights between various drag queens there ensconced.
John Cleese puts in an excellent performance, as always, as a manic, befuddled upper class English officer bewildered by the madness surrounding him.

Anonymous said...

"The current potential war in Ukraine is mostly a temper tantrum over not being able to cause the same amount of havoc and misery in Syria as they caused in Iraq."

Plenty of havoc and misery in Syria methinks. I think one Dan Drezner got it right when he opined that attacking Assad was a way of indirectly attacking Iran. Looks like attacking Russia is a way of indirectly attacking Syria ;-)


"My enemy's friend's friend is my enemy".

Be that as it may, Syria's causing tensions in Lebanon, Turkey and Iraq. I see there's now a bunch of Iraqi Shias fighting for Assad, just as there are Lebanese Shias.


Udolpho.com said...

I eagerly await the iSteve comments about how it's no big deal and beep boop trannies have a higher IQ so we should try to create more of them.

Anonymous said...

Re: the NH father arrested at the meeting. The blond woman seated in front of the man is a reporter from the most-watched television station in NH, WMUR.

Notice that the real press followed the scene while Blondie never even turned around to see what was happening.

Mr. Anon said...

"Anononymous said...

""FATHER ARRESTED & CUFFED at School Board Meeting For Protesting Pornographic Kid’s Book""

LOL, it's a book about a school shooting, but it's inappropriate reading for middle-schoolers because it has a sex scene and 'foul language'."

It was assigned reading, and - yes - it is inappropriate for fourteen year olds. The school board in question was too ashamed to read it allowed in front of the parents. If you don't understand why a man would not want his daughter to read a book in school about erections and ejaculation, then you are an idiot.

By the way, use of the tired and idiotic "LOL" already marks you as stupid.

pat said...

What little I remember of social psychology is that there is distinction between task-orientation and relationship-orientation.

Males are normally task oriented. So if you have a mixed group that self organizes around some job the men will tend to focus on doing that job. The women will tend to focus on supporting the work group itself rather than on the external task at hand.

A lot of feminists are infuriated by this sort of division but there it is.

Women often go into personnel whereas the more manly pursuit in most organizations is on main purpose of the organization. Here is more evidence that Chuck Hegel is a 'girly man'.

The whole thrust of the Obama administration is inward - 'belly button gazing.' This is either as symptom or a consequence of the 'decline of the US'. Maybe both.

So Obama tells NASA not to worry about going into space. Rather they should concern themselves about feelings toward Islam. Hegel's armed forces are told to ignore taking that hill, they should concentrate on how we feel about each other while taking that hill.

Concentrate of feelings and social justice and you ignore actual task fulfillment.

Pat Boyle

Anonymous said...

"I eagerly await the iSteve comments about how it's no big deal and beep boop trannies have a higher IQ so we should try to create more of them."

Pleasureman, stop knocking over strawmen and tell us again how manchildren are responsible for divroce and the outrageous behavior of western women.

trifecta said...

the only one that Israel could have conceivably benefited from is the Iraq war

I assume you mean the 2003 war. I'm not seeing how it benefited Israeli portfolio: unleashing Operation Untidy Freedom on the most boxed-in tyrant in the region, sowing chaos next door in Syria, and leaving Iran as top dog. This would not seem like a hopeful development.