Vets Group: Repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

More Than 100 Retired Generals And Admirals Call For Repeal Of Military's Policy On Gays

(AP)  More than 100 retired generals and admirals called Monday for repeal of the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy on gays so they can serve openly, according to a statement obtained by The Associated Press.

The move by the military veterans confronts the incoming administration of President-elect Barack Obama with a thorny political and cultural issue that dogged former President Bill Clinton early in his administration.

"As is the case with Great Britain, Israel, and other nations that allow gays and lesbians to serve openly, our service members are professionals who are able to work together effectively despite differences in race, gender, religion, and sexuality," the officers wrote.

While Mr. Obama has expressed support for repeal, he said during the presidential campaign that he would not do so on his own - an indication that he would tread carefully to prevent the issue from becoming a drag on his agenda. Mr. Obama said he would instead work with military leaders to build consensus on removing the ban on openly gay service members.

"Although I have consistently said I would repeal 'don't ask, don't tell,' I believe that the way to do it is make sure that we are working through a process, getting the Joint Chiefs of Staff clear in terms of what our priorities are going to be," Mr. Obama said in a September interview with the Philadelphia Gay News.

Tommy Vietor, a spokesman for Mr. Obama's transition team, declined comment.

The issue of gays in the military became a flash point early in the Clinton administration as Mr. Clinton tried to fulfill a campaign promise to end the military's ban on gays. His efforts created the current compromise policy - ending the ban but prohibiting active-duty service members from openly acknowledging they are gay.

But it came at a political cost. The resulting debate divided service members and veterans, put Democrats on the defensive and provided cannon fodder for social conservatives and Republican critics who questioned Mr. Clinton's patriotism and standing with the military.

Retired Adm. Charles Larson, a four-star admiral and two-time superintendent of the U.S. Naval Academy who signed the statement with 104 other retired admirals and generals, said in an interview that he believed Mr. Clinton's approach was flawed because he rushed to change military culture.

Larson said he hoped Mr. Obama would take more time to work with the Pentagon. Joining Larson among the signatories was Clifford Alexander, Army secretary under former President Jimmy Carter.

"There are a lot of issues they'll have to work out, and I think they'll have to prioritize," Larson said, noting that the new administration will immediately face combat-readiness issues and budget concerns. "But I hope this would be one of the priority issues in the personnel area."

The list of 104 former officers who signed the statement appears to signal growing support for resolving the status of gays in the military. Last year, 28 former generals and admirals signed a similar statement.

Larson, who has a gay daughter he says has broadened his thinking on the subject, believes a generational shift in attitudes toward homosexuality has created a climate where a repeal is not only workable, but also an important step for keeping talented personnel in the military.

"I know a lot of young people now - even people in the area of having commands of ships and squadrons - and they are much more tolerant, and they believe, as I do, that we have enough regulations on the books to enforce proper standards of human behavior," Larson said.

The officers' statement points to data showing there are about 1 million gay and lesbian veterans in the United States, and about 65,000 gays and lesbians currently serving in the military.

The military discharged about 12,340 people between 1994 and 2007 for violating the "don't ask, don't tell" policy, according to the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, a military watchdog group. The number peaked in 2001 at 1,273, but began dropping off sharply after the Sept. 11 attacks.

Last year, 627 military personnel were discharged under the policy.

Political observers say that even though the issue may not be as controversial as it was when Mr. Clinton addressed it, it's impossible to forget what happened then.

Larry Sabato, a political scientist at the University of Virginia, said Mr. Obama is unlikely to tackle the issue early on. Sabato said he expects Mr. Obama to focus on economic recovery and avoid risking the spark of a distracting "brush fire" controversy at the outset.

"I can't imagine that he will do this right in the beginning, given the Clinton precedent," Sabato said.

Aaron Belkin, who has studied the "don't ask, don't tell" policy as director of the Palm Center at the University of California at Santa Barbara and organized the officers' statement, said how Mr. Obama addresses the issue will be the first test for the new president on gay rights.

"Everyone is going to be interested to see how he responds," Belkin said.

[kansas1946]

No one should be asked to go into battle and risk their lives accompanied by sexual deviants.

If they must openly go into the service, set up all gay units and let them be the front line infantry.
Our enemies would get a real kick out of that.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by assemblyofso at 07:39 AM : Nov 19, 2008
********************************

No one should be asked to go into battle and risk their lives next to red-neck-pekker-headed bigots. If they must openly go into the service, set up all red-neck-pekker-headed units, and assign them laundry duty. Bigots are dangerous on a battle field.

[gaymale1]

It is a NICE IDEA ; HOWEVER just like that commentor there is STILL TOO MUCH PREJUGDES TOWARD *** , AND OUR RIGHTS . REMARKABLE , this country can elect a black person to the highest office in the country ; YET APPARENTLY IT IS STILL OK TO BE A BIGOT TOWARD THE GAY COMMUNITY ( anti. same *** marriage ).

[oldguy4truth]

Guns, ***, and on and on.. PARANOIA.
fear= suspicion = hate= intolerence.
They have always been *** in the military. I fought beside some in Viet Nam. I did not have to watch my azz because of them. I was glad to have anyone watching mine. The same rules apply today with more women in the military. Intimant sexual relationships are not tolerated.... That is good enough for me. Though, I am sure I would have been shot while engaged, had ther been a willing woman around.

[assemblyofso]

No one should be asked to go into battle and risk their lives accompanied by sexual deviants.

If they must openly go into the service, set up all gay units and let them be the front line infantry.
Our enemies would get a real kick out of that.

[kansas1946]

Whether in service or not Gay men will always watch your back.

Sorry, but that one was served on a silver platter. I couldn''''t resist.

Before you go all postal, I don''''t support don''''t ask don''''t tell but I support humor. Some of the gay jokes I get are from my gay friends.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by Questionnews at 04:53 PM : Nov 18, 2008

*********************************************

LMAO. Don''t worry. Most folks with tolerance also have a sense of humor. It is the bigots and intolerant that don''t. Good eye, I only wish I would have thought of it... :o)

[kansas1946]

So why waste time and energy fighting it? I can be very happy with my partner, our soon to be highly taxed income, our houses and vacations. Might just as well let the straight folks send their sons and daughters to the Middle East to be maimed and killed while I sun on the beach.
*******************************************

Doug, I have been saying this for years. I used to just make some of the lunch bunch furious when in talking about Iraq and my opposition to it, that if they instituted the draft that I would just tell my grandson to say he was gay. Of course they thought that was unpatriotic, but it was OK to deny young gay men and women the right to serve their country and forfeit their lives for that country that won''t even acknowledge they exist in the armed forces. Of course, bigots never have made much sense. Enjoy your Pina Colada on that beach!! :o)

[kansas1946]

Excellent point!! After a while, with effort & enlightenment the state votes will favor Gay marriage and hopefully that issue will get resolved.

BTW--CBS will allow the word Gay to be used, but not the plural form as in Gay.s. You still have to mangle that word.

I guess CBS wants to take it one gay at a time!



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by Questionnews at 01:41 PM : Nov 18, 2008
+ report abuse
**************************************

LOL. Well OK, gay. You are right. Full rights and liberties will come for gay s. All of these civil liberties issues have taken some time and some fighting. Look at what it took to get women just the right to vote. When something is right, the majority of people eventually overcome their fears and preducices and see the light. The hope is in our young voters. They are not concerned about this issue and will push the bigots "to the back of the bus." :o)

[kansas1946]

AP) More than 100 retired generals and admirals called Monday for repeal of the military''s "don''t ask, don''t tell" policy on *** so they can serve openly, according to a statement obtained by The Associated Press.
***********************************

Oh, my gosh. You mean the military is supporting this. It will be interesting to see if the spit-slinging Republicans who have been screaming bloody murder about, "Support the troops...support the troops" for six years will now "support the troops." I doubt it. Their version of "support the troops" is letting them die for Bush''s failed policies and terrible planning on the ground, without proper equipment.

[ord6591]

Instead of retired generals and admirals, ask the junior enlisted how they''d feel about being barracked with gay servicepeople - and if they express a negative or hostile opinion, then ask them why they feel or react that way...the answer you get right at that point will be your starting point for your dialogue, not from any general grade officer.

[doug716ac]

Here''s the Bon Bons cheetah - could you pass the binoculars; I want to read the big sign on the ship President Bush just landed on . . . "M-I-S-S-I . . ."

[questionnews]

I''''m an old f.a.r.t. and don''''t pretend to be gay rights supporter. However, with the information that''''s available to us, we know there are many gay people, most of them still not in the open. First, I favor civil unions with full rights to each of the partners. I am opposed to gay "marraige" as that should be a rite between a man and a woman. I served in the military and probably served with gay men, although I didn''''t know it at the time. When you''''re in combat, you need someone at your back; you''''re not going to ask about their religion, race or sexuality, you need your back covered.

Posted by aldon61 at 04:14 PM : Nov 18, 2008


Whether in service or not Gay men will always watch your back.

Sorry, but that one was served on a silver platter. I couldn''t resist.

Before you go all postal, I don''t support don''t ask don''t tell but I support humor. Some of the gay jokes I get are from my gay friends.

[aldon61]

I''m an old f.a.r.t. and don''t pretend to be gay rights supporter. However, with the information that''s available to us, we know there are many gay people, most of them still not in the open. First, I favor civil unions with full rights to each of the partners. I am opposed to gay "marraige" as that should be a rite between a man and a woman. I served in the military and probably served with gay men, although I didn''t know it at the time. When you''re in combat, you need someone at your back; you''re not going to ask about their religion, race or sexuality, you need your back covered. There is no reason why these gay soldiers can''t serve openly. The biggest problem I can see is how they might be treated by their fellow soldiers and non-coms. Life could become pretty brutal given the make-up of their unit.

[aldon61]

I see the f*u*d*g*e packers are out in force today.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by Obama_Dkhed at 03:53 PM : Nov 18, 2008
+ report abuse
Is everyone on this board a ***??


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by Obama_Dkhed at 03:51 PM : Nov 18, 2008
report abuse

You had three posts deleted by CBS on the site where Obama said the US would lead to clean up the planet. The guy that said CBS is very active today is right on the money.

[questionnews]

I think the CBS censor must be having a bad day. Posts are getting deleted like porn on a priest''s laptop.

[cheetah-man7]

doug716ac -- I wholeheartedly agree with you! Let those straighties get shot up and killed. If the GLBT members are not good enough to fight, then they are not good enough to die either. OK, please pass the BonBons...

[doug716ac]

It''s pretty clear that the majority of people in this country do not feel we should have equal rights. No right to marry, no open military service, etc.

So why waste time and energy fighting it? I can be very happy with my partner, our soon to be highly taxed income, our houses and vacations. Might just as well let the straight folks send their sons and daughters to the Middle East to be maimed and killed while I sun on the beach.

If they don''t want us, seems like a pretty good deal all around. They''ve done all they can to erode our patriotism anyway, so let''s move back to hedonism and let them do the heavy lifting. More power to them.

I''ll gladly pay another $5,000 in taxes to buy them all the weapons, supplies and body bags they require. No problem. They''re keeping me safe, rich and happy! Thank you :) !!!

[questionnews]

So let me pose this question... if the military decides it''''s okay for *** to serve in the military (which they''''ve been doing since day 1), then we must accept that gay people are serving their country in defence of our rights as Americans. But the American people (generally) are against gay marriage and/or gay rights as a whole, so what we would really be telling them is "... you''''re fighting for the rights of only heterosexual Americans, cause you don''''t warrant the same rights as they do, but keep on fighting and killing for us". I can''''t imagine why any gay person would want to serve this country that hates them so much they would restrict their rights as a citizen.

Posted by duhrer at 01:23 PM : Nov 18, 2008


Excellent point!! After a while, with effort & enlightenment the state votes will favor Gay marriage and hopefully that issue will get resolved.

BTW--CBS will allow the word Gay to be used, but not the plural form as in Gay.s. You still have to mangle that word.

I guess CBS wants to take it one gay at a time!

[colt8881]

Who cares if somebody is GAYE, I sure dont care if somebody is Gaye. There are 3 people who work on my floor and in my division that are gay and all 3 of them are great workers and Are at Work On Time more they 90% of the Straight people.

WHO CARES. I sure dont & some of the people who wisper and gossip about being gaye are just stupid and need to grow the frack up and get a life and mind their own business. NOZY PEOPLE SUCK !

I have more things to worry about then somebodys sexxuality.

[olivia4441]

SO, swith the question and ask yourself "Does it mater that a black President was elected mostly by people who have no idea what they voted for?" When asked who Pelosi or Reed are they do not know. When asked who runs Congress they do not know. Whether you are gay or not, black or not, is not the point, what is the point is whether they are qualified..are *** any less qualified? Is the black man qualified? Two differant answers, indeed.

[duhrer]

So let me pose this question... if the military decides it''s okay for *** to serve in the military (which they''ve been doing since day 1), then we must accept that gay people are serving their country in defence of our rights as Americans. But the American people (generally) are against gay marriage and/or gay rights as a whole, so what we would really be telling them is "... you''re fighting for the rights of only heterosexual Americans, cause you don''t warrant the same rights as they do, but keep on fighting and killing for us". I can''t imagine why any gay person would want to serve this country that hates them so much they would restrict their rights as a citizen.