Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire On target.....FIRE for effect!

Got this from friend Darby


Comments on the military (in response to the transgender BS)

Nobody has a "right" to serve in the Military. Nobody.

What makes people think the Military is an equal opportunity employer? Very far from it.

The Military uses prejudice regularly and to deny citizens from joining for being too old or too young, too fat or too skinny, too tall or too short.

Citizens are denied for having flat feet, or for missing or additional fingers. Poor eyesight will disqualify you, as well as bad teeth. Malnourished? Drug addiction? Bad back? Criminal history? Low IQ? Anxiety? Phobias? Hearing damage? Six arms? Hear voices in your head? Self-identify as a Unicorn?

Need a special access ramp for your wheelchair? Can't run the required course in the required time? Can't do the required number of pushups?

Not really a "morning person" and refuse to get out of bed before noon?
All can be reasons for denial.

The Military has one job. War. Anything else is a distraction and a liability.
Did someone just scream "That isn't Fair"? War is VERY unfair, there are no exceptions made for being special or challenged or socially wonderful.

YOU change yourself to meet Military standards. Not the other way around.
I say again: You don't change the Military... you must change yourself.
The Military doesn't need to accommodate anyone with special issues. The Military needs to Win Wars.

If any of your personal issues are a liability that detract from readiness or lethality... Thank you for applying and good luck in future endeavors. Who's next ?

amen!

Agree!

As if we need a bunch of nutjobs in the military

https://www.wsj.com/articles/paul-mchugh-transgender-surgery-isnt-the-solution-1402615120

Yup.

Navy wouldn't take me back in '71 because my hearing was already damaged.

Army was glad to have me though!

Good post again, as usual.

Doesn't get any clearer than that !

Spot on and well said. 👍

Yep...

Give my regards to your friend Darby...... Wonder where he got it?... Or did he write it?... Either way that thing is spot on.

diametric to the mission statement of the left. coombyah!

My father was deemed physically ineligible to serve in the military in WW II, and I was deemed physically ineligible to serve in the early 1990's. Disappointing but not all who wish to serve in the military are deemed fit to serve.

22-250, I got the Transgender - Military Review message from a like-minded fellow veteran, and decided to pass it along to like-minded veterans. Like Terry

I never went for a physical, but I'm pretty sure rampant varicose veins would have disqualified me. Had them since I was 15. Many sheep hunts and "death marches" with heavy packs ensued, no problem. Just got them fixed this spring. I now have purty legs....

That runs the gamut from frustrating to heartbreaking. I had a kid in my basic training platoon that had only three fingers on one hand. He could do everything we all did up to that point in Basic where it was discovered by the Commander. The Senior Drill found out and cursed the Recruiter that gave that kid false hopes. The Army clearly had stated that only one finger could be missing from each hand. The kid was processed out despite the NCOs trying to get an exception to policy. That kid really wanted to be there.

And then there was the physically gifted [bleep] that joined the Army only because he wanted to hurt his old man, a active Navy SEAL. When the dirtball faked a suicide attempt my First Sergeant called the dad. The Seal told my First Sergeant to "smoke his bags and don't cut the pussy any slack. Maybe you can make a man out of him; I failed" After his second (faked) suicide attempt this kid, who was so physically fit he could have made it into any assignment, crapped out on everybody because he wanted to be a mall rat and piss off Daddy. The Army regs were clear and the kid had to go. So the Seal and the three fingered kid were both hurt by regulations. But the regs are there for a reason.

What I am trying to say is that it is hard for a large organization, dependent on everyone doing there jobs, to accept everyone, including the marginal Mission capable. Sambo I am sorry you could not get in but thank you for trying. Most of my (California) peer group did coke and chased pussy on their way to MBAs and small fortunes. They never gave Service a thought.

Couldn't have said it better.

I don't have a dog in this particular fight, but it seems to me that such things as flat feet, poor eyesight or being too fat or too short go directly to inherent requirements of the job of a soldier in a combat role, or one who may be called upon to take up a rifle and fight. A background of crimes or drug dependency might also go to your ability to trust them.

In terms of transgender, I wonder if it is quite so clear? I certainly get (and agree with) the arguments against the .gov having to stump up the cost of treatment, and give people time off to get it done. I wouldn't be surprised to find that "transitioning" from male to sort-of female has effects on performance too, though I don't know, but what about a woman taking testosterone? As I remember the Olympic Games of the Cold War era this may arguably more than negative concerns about such a person's physical performance.

I also suspect that this argument falls down even more when applied to homosexuals of both varieties. Leaving aside such things as how others may feel about homosexuals in their midst, I can't really see how the sexual preference adversely affects the ability to perform the inherent functions of a warrior. History is too littered with examples demonstrating that it doesn't.

I should probably also say that I served, but not in your army. When I did serve, sexual relationships between soldiers were barred. I don't recall anyone revealing themself as homosexual, but I wouldn't be surprised to know that some might have been. I personally couldn't care less if they were - not my business either way as far as I'm concerned. IMHO such matters are private, and shouldn't intrude at work. Perhaps if soldiers keep their preferences to themselves while at work, much of the concern goes away.

I agree T lee.

That Darby character is A-OK!

Thanks for the post and the forward from the fine gent!

Nice try, Mike - no chance of you getting my chili recipe. FWIW I sent the money back.

Cheers, DARBY