If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
What is "ludicrous" is your infantile, ignorant, self-possessed, delusional perception that ANYONE has a "right" to military service. Combat is NOT about rights; combat is about RESPONSIBILITY, a concept in which most of you that are devoid of the military experience seem to wallow about in your pathetic stupidity. Military service is about subordination of SELF to the mission goal.
In military service, you have NOT the right to an opinion OTHER than the one issued to you. You HAVE the right to "stand AT EASE", which, for those of you outside of the military experience, means "close that disgusting sewer in your face, and SHUT THE FUCK UP!"
Combat is NOT a politically correct activity: it is the LOWEST common denominator in existence... KILL OR BE KILLED! In a combat situation, ANYTHING which compromises the effectiveness of the unit will be SUMMARILY ELIMINATED, up to and including a bullet in your fat head!
One of my fellow vets experienced a female in his armored vehicle during Desert Storm, and wild dogs chased her stench across Saudi Arabia. MOST of the females in the armored maintenance unit got pregnant rather than be deployed. REALITY, not your bullshit fantasy. The cartoons you watch glorifying female warriors are CARTOONS! Females and queers would GUT the effectiveness of a combat unit.
We ARE the barbaric heathens you think us to be, and THAT is the reason you have the freedom to demean us, rather than to be culled from the population as defectives. Think about THAT...
If you cannot deal with that reality, TOUGH SHIT! You have no greater comprehension of what military service is about than I have of the eccentricities of the degenerate and depraved queer existence.
If this offends you, TOUGH SHIT. Reality IS a motherfucker, isn't it?
As to previous comments concerning the effectiveness of the US forces during Vietnam, the reality is that the US forces OBLITERATED the Viet Cong and NVA to the tune of a 66:1 kill ratio, the enemy won NOT ONE SINGLE MAJOR BATTLE, but the victory was GIVEN AWAY by dilettante, self-styled supremist/elitest politicians and bureaucrats more interested in buggering each other than fulfilling their responsibilities. The similarities between THOSE, and many of the "politically correct", touchie/feelie, pathetic pederast daisy-chain denizens posting their delusionary wetdream visions here, are a compelling reason to believe that the IRA WILL succeed in burying your pathetic asses! BELIEVE ME, they COMPREHEND the realities of combat!
Sorry to have to be the one to point out your delusion, but 'Starship Troopers' was fiction! Might just as well prove out theories of combat by quoting a Donald Duck cartoon. ROTFLMFAO! Pathetic...
Perhaps, rather than prove your complete and utter ignorance concerning ANYTHING military in nature, you civilians should simply retire to the fantasy sex forums and compare notes on butt-plugs and other things within your experience...
[This message has been edited by thanatos (edited 15-08-2001).]
To suggest that a gay man would 'go crazy' cos he's 'a princess at heart' is highly offensive, as i'm sure you already know. I don't consider my self a princess, nor am i limp wristed, camp or any other gay sterotype.
I'm leaving it there cos i can't even be asred wasting any more of my time and effort replying to your bigoted opinions."
I'm sure you fine all I said highly offensive. I believe in the Bible and God, you can't change that. My that very nature, I have to believe that Homosexuality is a sin and a deprave action. And in the military, specificly the Marine Corps was founded around GOD, Corps, Country. In that order that is what we are taught. You have your feelings, but I am being honest with you all. You asked the questions now face the results. You are hearing the truth deal with it!!!
"Its ignorant, naive, pathetic little people that create all the problems in the first place and give humans a bad name. "
It isn't that we are ignorat; you don't have a firm grasp on the real world. Naive? are you serious? We experiance the world, go to places you wouldn't want to. Study and train to deal with the darkest reality's in the human heart and it's nature. We aren't by far the little people, remeber that there are soldiers in your country that are the same in thought and training as us. That is the only reason you have the ability to spuw out this druel you call thought!
"oh and isnt it also one of the ten comandments that u shouldnt kill??? Well being in the military and all Id say u certainly cant follow everything in the bible etc!"
Actually if you were to look at the hebrew text it would translate closer to murder. There was never a conseption that anyone would be ignorant enough to think that it would refer to the protection of ones country. God comanded the Israelites to 'ethnic cleanse' those who were of a depraved mind (to include homosexuals, sorry but it's true).
"to be gay is not a disorder. you need to start living in the 21st century where we dont hate people for something that they are"
Why would you hate someone then? no logic I swear. It is a disorder, I do live in the 21st century, and I would not ever live with openly gay flamers in my military.
more to come later, must leave now
just as an interesting aside, what makes you think that the US military has never contained any homosexuals in its glorious (!) history. what makes you think that, in all those who lined up at gettysburg, yorktown, and countless others, that none was gay. GET REAL. the military of a great many nations have been functioning superbly for aeons, without any anti-gay laws. who knows, perhaps US Grant was a closet homosexual - doesnt make him any less a man, does, it. doesnt make him any less of a great general. doesnt decrease the morale of his troops, does it? its only recently that, as you say (paraphrase), 'homosexuality has come to the surface'. thus, it is only recently that discrimination has come to the surface too.
finally, to say that the IRA understand the realities of combat, now that really is fuckin stupid. killing civilians when, in fact, political solutions are being put in to practise already - is THAT the reality of combat???????
oh, and the NVA may not have won any battles (questionable, but i'll play along), but they won the war. the US didn't throw victory away - to win, they woudl have had to kill every man, woman and child in indochina. they made a fucking good shot at it, but failed.
ignorant - from ignorance comes prejudice
infantile - childishness is in part an inability to see other people's points of view
delusional - gays leading a 'depraved' lifestyle?
i think, my friend, that you describe yourself, not me.
(i am self-possessed, after all, i am a free man - see other topics for elaboration)
Nolite te bastardes carborundorum
Re-read my earlier post. Now do it again, just to make sure. Good. Thank you.
Right, then.
(1) I did not say an average woman would make as good as a marine as the average man. Far from it. I did, however, state that they make better fighter pilots for simple anthropometric reasons. Of course, if they were to get shot down, your whole 'bloodhounds chase the mentsruating woman' argument does come into play.
(2) I KNOW BLOODY WELL THAT 'STARSHIP TROOPERS' IS A WORK OF FICTION.
Sorry. Deep breaths. <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/smile.gif">
If you'd actually read the book you would have known what I was on about. In the book, Heinlein postulates that women dominate some sections of the Federal Services. The Mobile Infantry (read 'marines') are almost exclusively male; the Fleet crews, especially the navigators and command officers, are mostly female.
I'm not saying that women WOULD, in fact, make better captains for the US Navy. Heinlein was, however, making a valid point: there may well be military tasks for which women are better suited.
Of course, the other great reason to read Starship Troopers (as opposed to watching the film) is that it provides another (very good) perspective on the service-citizenship issue.
The only issue for thanatos (snr & jr) a persons sexuality, not their fighting ability. They blame the US defeat in Vietnam on the people 'buggering' each other back home. I think that Ho Chi-Minh deserves some credit - as do the VC who were able to brainwash the population better than the US. Burning down someones village probably wasn't the best way to win hearts and minds.
It wouldn't surprise me if these two thought that Hitler had a point, when it comes to his opinion about the jews.
Is being a moron genetic? It certainly seems so.
Thanatos has the RIGHT to be as bigoted toward gays as he wants...If Jeffrey has the right to be gay then Thanatos has the right to dislike him...
Amazing how this tolerance thing works only one way isnt it.
lmfao and have just narrowed down exactly what beleiving in god is to some people. As the old saying goes "If u need to have faith then there is a god".
For your information I have lost far too many people in life and also been on my death bed myself so please dont tell me that when that happens Ill end uip beleiving in god coz thats very wrong indeed.
It would be really nice to beleive in something, I dunno I guess just to belong...but thats all religion is to a lot of people isnt it?!
Personally I could never like god even if he did exist for the simple fact he lets too much nasty shit go on in the world and therefore must be an arsehole!
Im expecting the usual 'everything happens for a reason' response but thats not enough of an answer for me really...what good could ever come out of a child being tortured to death by some fucked up mad-man, or a teenager going through so much crap in their life that they kill themselves...need I go on?
Round of applause...I could never have been so nice about it if I had tried to say anything in response to that two pricks above...u know a lot of people beleive that homophobics r only that way due to the fact they cant accept they r infact gay themselves! Interesting thought isnt it?
Oh open your eyes will u this is just crap. We r all aware that everyone is allowed to express their oppinion etc, but unfortunatly its not what u say but how u say it.
Not one person on here, that thinks gay people have no place in the army, has actually managed to express their oppinion without being rude, offensive and basically totally anti-gay and ignorant.
If someone came on here and simply stated their oppinion and why they felt that way, without actually insulting people by saying gay's r infact just that way as a result of abuse etc...or that they would not be as good to the military coz they would be looking at other mens arses...or how about women being a problem because they have monthly periods (this one was just hilarious...fair play for coming up with it coz I was in hysterics and how desperate u were to insult people u had to stoop that low lmfao)!
Nobody here ever is against someone having a different oppinion.... but not many of us will stand for a person expressing that oppinion by being fucking rude and disgusting...so maybe u understand things a bit better now?
I made no comment on the relative rights or wrongs of being gay..No comments about why people are gay, no comments about mens arses. I also cant find any mention of womens periods in my posts...Incidentally, the thing with wild dogs actually happened in the Gulf war..Its a documented fact, not made up by some stroppy bloke <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/smile.gif">
You seem to be the main user of insulting and disgusting words on this thread lolly..If you cant get your point across without swearing then dont even try.
Several of us here are military - we have experience.
What is TOTALLY FUCKING CLEAR is that your emotionalism makes you a liability in ANY combat situation. Your insistence upon "rights" of ANY individual, as opposed to the responsibility of an individual to his squad, and MISSION, disgusts me beyond my capacity to address your abominable stupidity and self righteousness.
AS CLEARLY AS CAN BE STATED: ANYTHING WHICH DETRACTS OR DISTRACTS FROM MISSION CAPABILITY IS A LIABILITY, AND MUST BE ELIMINATED! If you are a hetero-sexual male, and your whore-chasing detracts from mission capable status, you will be eliminated. If you are a female, and the female bodily function inhibit your capability, you must be eliminated. If you are homo-sexual, and parade it in front of everyone, you distract from mission capability, detract from your squad's effectiveness, and you will be eliminated.
Individual rights have NO FUCKING PLACE in a military capacity. NOT MINE, NOT YOURS, NOT ANYONE'S. Neither straight, queer, male, female, or confused upon the issue.
The "moron" is you, little bitch-boy...
It was the likes of you MORONIC, INEFFECTUAL, INCOMPETENT, INEPT, PATHETIC LITTLE BITCHES, whether male, female, or confused upon the issue, which gave "Uncle Ho" the determination to continue to pour millions of grist to the slaughter, knowing that your pathetic lack of commitment would eventually sicken you to the realities of war. The NVA and Viet Cong burned so many villages, and murdered so many civilians, as to make the collateral civilian losses due to US troops IN-FUCKING-SIGNIFICANT! Get off of your ignorant supremist/elitest high horses, and inquire of those WHO WERE THERE to get some significant glimpse of the TRUTH!!!
Vietnam was a MILITARY victory given away by cowardly politicians, swayed by the cowards within the voting block. Sheep. Those who NEED to be protected from themselves, because of their INABILITY to function in the real world, and their emotional climging to their delusions.
You think ME to be rude, crude, and brutally feral??? GET A FUCKING CLUE: Charles was INCREDIBLY more so. They butchered their own. LITERALLY BUTCHERED!!! Hiding in your simplistic, pathetic little microcosms, you have not the slightest comprehension of the reality of life (and death) in THAT world, in THAT region OF the world. Your insufferable ignorance is an abomination.
You think me to be rude, crude, and brutally feral? Hideous to your sensitivities. Guess what, you pissant little sister? I am simply what is necessary to be effective in THAT world. My memories are more horrific than ANYTHING you could conjure in your effeminent immitation Twilight Zone moments of nightmare.
If you are NOT the equally feral example of "barbarism", then you would be NOTHING more than a KIA statistic, and the means to the senseless squandering of military units. YOU would be the cause of death to your allies.
Run your pathetic bullshit at ANY combat ready member of British military. Run your bullshit at SAS members. I am merely allowing you to observe the SURFACE of what you are MUCH too pathetic to face. By what you post here, you would drown in your own fecal excrement should you have to face what ANY COMBAT VETERAN has lived through.
In ANY society that would form from the defeat and subjugation of your little island, YOU PATHETIC PISSANTS would be culled from society as degenerate defectives. It is ONLY because of heathens like me that you have the PRIVILEGE of demeaning what you cannot comprehend.
I have more respect for the NVA warriors that I hunted and killed than you disgusting chancres...
If the forces had been depleted to the point that women and queers were needed, then the war has ALREADY been lost. Given the choice of hunting on my own, or being paired up with a liability which would get me killed, I would remain alone, as would ANY warrior.
You DEFINE weakness...
If Grant were a "CLOSET" homosexual, then he would NOT have been parading it as his "right", and it would not have been a problem. It would NOT have compromised his effectiveness. If he HAD been queer, and made it known, he would have been executed...
Perhaps, as in "Bladerunner", where Pris was better suited as a "pleasure-model"?
Sarcasm aside, you are STILL quoting fantasy to attempt to prove a point in the real world. That defines and typifies DELUSIONAL!
You simpering little bitch-boy, you DEFINE the reason that queers are excluded from service. You "feel". "Feeling" is a weakness, and a liability.
The problem is not that you are a "freak"; it is that you are devoid of discipline. Discipline is the foundation of the military. If you have not the personal discipline to observe and obey the rules, as set, you are a liability, and will cause the death of others, and the failure of mission objectives.
You snivel and whimper that you MUST be gay, that it is NOT a matter of choice. Fine. Embrace it. BE it! But do NOT attempt to be what you are not ~ fit for military service.
BTW ~ just for clarity, I could GIVE A FUCK about the color of a person's skin who serves beside me. I could give a fuck concerning his religious beliefs, or the lack thereof. The ONLY pertinent issue is whether I could trust him to cover six. That is ALL that matters!
[This message has been edited by thanatos (edited 16-08-2001).]
[This message has been edited by thanatos (edited 16-08-2001).]
This thread's getting pretty heated.
The main consensus of opinion from the GI side seems to be it is ONLY military effectiveness that counts, only those that CAN execute a mission goal should be on that mission to start with. This theme is carried through to the military indoctrination and training. If you're not fit for the job then you won't be allowed to do that job. That makes perfect sense to me, don't send a postman to do the job of an architect.
To this end I wonder why those people who are gay are treated as being one and the same. It is assumed that if you are gay then you won't make the grade. Instead can you not treat anyone who is gay as an induvidual, to be put through the wringer of training the same as anyone else. You can't automatically assume that gay=useless until that theory has been tested on every single gay person in the world. If they don't make the grade then they have nothing to complain about, if they do make the grade, are fitter than anyone else, are a sharper shooter, has a superior grasp of strategy and tactics, are natural leaders, and the key point is military effectiveness, than what's the difference?? It is like assuming that American GI's = moronic, bigoted, inbred assholes, it may be true for a minority but not for everyone right??
I think there may be some confusion between personal opinions and the practical reality of the issue (I know what you're gonna say, no grasp of practical reality etc.)
As for the ladies in the military, on average there is a difference between male and female physique, and that can come into effect, so I'm not entirely sure on this one.
BTW these anti-gay laws are nothing new, they are as old as the US and even older than that. Every US service has in laws no f*cking flaming faggots laws.
I hadnt aimed that at u, it was aimed in general to the ones who have come out with the insults towards gay people!
As for being the one who uses the most disgusting words and insults...all I can say is u r most probably right in some ways as I can have a bad mouth on me when it comes to fucking swearing lmfao! I do also find it hard to make my point without using swear words when I get a bit fired up...this is a fact.
However Im certainly not the worst for insulting people...if u think that then we most definatly stand no chance of ever seeing eye to eye. I never insult people unless they have insulted me or somebody else first. Im not an unfair person and I dont go around throwing insults and swearing just for the sake of it....its always in response to someone else being insulting!
If u wernt implying that at all then ignore it, I must have got a little confused by your way of putting things...which is easy to do when u r coming across like some sort of robot!
God knows what the fuck u r rambling on about all your shit for anyway...I couldnt give a crap about any of it or wether or not u think I could handle being in the military...who the fuck would wanna be able to handle it anyway, coz Id much rather care about the fact innocent people get killed etc etc and actually give a shit rather than end up like a robot not feeling anything just so u can survive in combat...great way to be Im sure, yea right!
My point isnt about why people r more or less effective in the millitary...my point is that nobody should be immediatly eliminated (seems that words gonna stick in my head lol) based solely on their sexuality or skin colour or gender...everybody should be given the chnace and then if they fail to meet standards then they can be eliminated lol!
Mostly Im angered at the way u have insulted gay people and women and whatever else u seem to wanna throw insults at. Perhaps if u had made your point without openly expressing your disgusting attitude to anyone who is not the same as u and basically being rude and disrespectfull to other people on this board then I might have taken your point and said fair enough.
Its clear though that u r that ignorant and pathetic u cant at least use the word gay instead of queer...that alone can be an insult!
Im intrigued as to how being gay means u have no discipline...however Im not asking u to explain that one to me as Id rather not have to look at anymore of your absolute crap...even if it has entertained me in some ways lol!
It would seem that nobody is fit for anything other than having to hear u rabbit on and on about being eliminated, fit for military or being a bitch-boy...go back to wherever it is u came from and carry on with your military life-style and your pathetic way of thinking etc etc etc, coz it dosent really belong on a teen website aimed at advicing people rather than insulting them and basically behaving how u have...to put it bluntly FUCK OFF!
oh yes, ditto <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/smile.gif"> go lolly and her many arses! <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/biggrin.gif">
Out of my mind. Back in five minutes.
I'm a straight serving soldier in the British Armed Forces and in my opinion gays and women DO NOT make ANY regiment a liability.
Whether it's on excercise, patrol or a fuckin' war zone the strength of any unit is from the unit .. if someone's on an off day then you pull together to attain the same battle strength as you would have.
This doesn't mean a unit has to pull together more frequently if it has 2 women and a gay bloke in the unit.
Your opinion .. fair enough.
It's outdated, homohpobic and is thankfully very much non-existent nowadays .. maybe you should combine training with women .. or maybe your getting to 'attached' to other blokes in your base ?? <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/smile.gif">
It's tossers like you who bring a bad name upon your Armed Forces because you live in your own little ' ideal world balloon' .. time to burst it and WAKE UP !!
What would you do if a gay guy had to give to resuscitate you in a war zone ?? Nothing ... cos you'd be fuckin dead if he hadn't !!
Do you think they would say ' oh no there's that prick that hates gays i'll let him die ??' simple answer NO
Once again, you're entitled to your opinion Balddog, even thought it's egotistical, condescending and totally unfounded.
Are you a soldier??
What have you based it on .. your views ??
Women and Gays are more than capable of doing the job and are probably both mentally, and physcially stronger than you will EVER be.
Maybe that's why you have the attitude .. trying to keep the flag flying for the sexist, homophobic worldwide race ??
If you were taken hostage, for example, in the UK there's a 90% chance that the SAS would be directly involved. If a gay trooper, or a female trooper 'neutralised' the situation and was able to release you from your captors, then your saying that you would willingly sit there and remain compromised because your rescuers are gay or female?? <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/confused.gif">
DIDN'T FUCKIN THINK SO !!!!!!!! <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/biggrin.gif">
Visit Alzaweb <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/smilie/guitarist.gif">
[This message has been edited by Powerslave (edited 17-08-2001).]
Having fought with one individually that I am sure was as 'gender challenged' as a $3 bill but who was so private with his life that I can only say...he soldiered with us and did it well! Had he brought any of it with us we would have slit his throat in the field and blamed it on Charlie! As it was, he was one dangerous SOB...probably a doccumentable psychopatic killer...he died bravely. Nuf said.
Women in combat snivvle and complain more but ultimately are more dangerous than the men if they fight...it is not that they are stronger, or even as strong as, the men...but rather that women by their nature are more accustomed to doing a lot of grubby things that don't set well with men...examples abound in the old Soviet armies...Charlie used women in combat...and they took a bit to kill.
Guess I am just too old for the multiculturalist gender challenged bunch to be 'prancing' about in the barraks or BOQ!
Any human in the right job can serve his or her nation or cause...it is the puting them 'out of place' that causes troubles to rise...I would remind all that some of history's most dangerous terrorist were 'gender challenged' and without a shred of concense (sp) or morality.
Getting late for me, probably offended someone...which is OK so long as they aren't Irish or French, in which case ta!
Diesel
88888888
While MANY of you might not comprehend, Diesel has brought the EXACT point to bear. That person Diesel spoke of kept it to himself, and it did not become an issue. ANYTHING which detracts from mission capability will be eliminated. Keep it to yourself, and it is a non-issue.
Very likely, there have been a number of homosexuals that have served with me, but they did not rub it in my face, nor the others who served with us. Non issue. Point of the "don't tell" policy. Had they pushed their deviant behavior upon us, our responce likely would have been the same as would Diesel's squad...
Just because there are them that practice pedophilia, or necrophilia, does not make THOSE acts acceptable, either. Same/same. They are just as repugnant to the majority of people. Deviant sexual behavior IS STILL deviant sexual behavior. If you have not the personal discipline to keep deviant behavior to yourself, you have not the discipline to make it in the military setting.
BTW ~ I did not start this thread. Someone else did, and I held my position in check until my level of disgust compelled response. You call it out, you deal with it. Don't request the song unless you are ready to dance to it...
You think me a bigot because I do NOT pander to degenerate behavior. What does that make YOU???
...and exactly WHAT is your MOS? Ever actually BEEN deployed to armed combat, up close and personal? Not little games, but the REAL thing? If not, then you CERTAINLY have not the personal experience to make a judgement concerning what is or is not a liability.
Diesel HAS, and therefore, I MUST respect his position, even when I disagree with it. When he speaks, he does so from experience, not from fantasy. And NOT from science fiction...
"Powerslave"? Does that have something to do with B&D? S&M? Little kinky behavior in YOUR pedigree? <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/rolleyes.gif">
[This message has been edited by thanatos (edited 17-08-2001).]
So the question remanins, homosexuals in the military or not??
The Thanatos's have varied their answers from outright "NO" (with their "depraved" lifestyles 'n all) to a more moderate, "so long as it's not in my face" response after consideration of their own views.
Only users lose drugs
How on earth can you possibly know that? Have you even been in a battlefield situation with a few openly gay men or women? Didnt think so...Your opinions mean about as much as mine seeing as they are based on hypotheticals...There are no openly gay men or women in front line combat units in the British army.
How in the hell do you come up with egotistical????Condescending..hmm nope cant see that there either...totally unfounded? Well my opinions are founded on my observations and conversations...You do actually know the meaning of those words you just mentioned right?
Nope, Im not a soldier..Its based on my observations of British culture and with conversations on the subject on a great many forums.
Well done, with that comment you just totally undermined your argument...You say my comments are unfounded and yet you make a MASSIVE generalisation and say ALL women and ALL gays will be better than me in every way..You have never met me, you have no idea about my physical and mental strength..You sir, are no better than those who say all gays are limped wristed queens.
I can honestly say, I am in no way sexist or homophobic..If you want to stick your head in the sand and say men and women dont have different physical capabilities then thats your right but dont state it as fact. I have no irrational fear of gays, I have no problem whatsoever with gays in any way shape or form..I believe their effect on any group of straight men is plain to see..Now, unless soldiers have been trained into something other than the normal man(which they havent), then soldiers will react to a gay guy the same way as 'most' other men do..
sexist, homophobic worldwide race? I have no idea what you mean by that, sorry.
90% chance the SAS would be involved if I were taken hostage? And you say youre in the army? I get taken hostage in a raid on my local abbey national, I can assure you it WONT be the SAS coming to save me.
Please show me where I said ANYTHING OF THE FUCKING SORT....I stated that a gay guy would have an effect of the combat effectiveness of a frontline unit...I can see you can read but you obviously have comprehension of what people write..Please re-read my comments and get a fucking clue.
Soldier my anus.
<IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/smilie/thumbs.gif">
What's your term? Wanker? Not up on Brit colloquialisms. How about "jerking himself off in front of us for his own amusement"?
If it is NOT out in the open, no one is to know, and therefore it is NOT an issue. THAT is the basis of the comment concerning DISCIPLINE. ANY soldier lacking the requisite discipline should be cut from the ranks, lest he/she/it endanger the ranks.
If women could compete physically with men, HOLD THEIR OWN, then there would NOT be separate sports leagues for women. Truth is the vaunted US women's soccer team had its collective head handed to it by a U-16 group of BOYS! The world record for women in 800m or 1500m is SLOWER than what we were running in high school THIRTY YEARS AGO (and every other event, also). If enemy armies were made up of kidlets in their mid-teens, then women MIGHT be able to hold their own.
SOME women might certainly are able to compete with SOME men, but combat units are NOT composed of the physical defectives of society, and women CANNOT hold their own in them.
Get thee back to your science fiction and jerk thyself off THERE!
IT DOES NOT MATTER WHETHER YOU APPROVE OF MY REVULSION TO FAGGOTS OR NOT: the TRUTH is that the vast majority of adult males, COMPETENT to serve in battle units ARE of a like mind to me, and the presence of a little queen or a little princess would destroy the morale of a fighting unit.
Esprit de corps is the HEART of a combat unit. Destroy that, and you destroy the combat effectiveness of that unit.
[This message has been edited by thanatos (edited 17-08-2001).]
thanatos...
God knows what the fuck u r rambling on about all your shit for anyway...I couldnt give a crap about any of it...
Being respondent to the many views divergent from mine is rambling? or simply being respondent?
...who the fuck would wanna be able to handle it anyway, coz Id much rather care about the fact innocent people get killed etc etc and actually give a shit rather than end up like a robot not feeling anything just so u can survive in combat...great way to be Im sure, yea right!
ANYONE who desires to be in the military NEEDS to be aware of the requirements of duty, including the mental and emotional make-up. THAT was the topic of this thread. Can't debate something and merely demean what does not agree with your unfounded position...
My point isnt about why people r more or less effective in the millitary...my point is that nobody should be immediatly eliminated (seems that words gonna stick in my head lol) based solely on their sexuality or skin colour or gender...everybody should be given the chnace and then if they fail to meet standards then they can be eliminated lol!
If you have a functioning menstrual cycle, you eliminate yourself from frontline capability. If you are an open ****** , you eliminate yourself from ALL service. NOWHERE HAVE I INFERRED THAT RACE, OR COLOR OF SKIN IS DETERMINATE! In point of fact, I PLAINLY stated the opposite, but THAT would not dovetail with your emotional position, would it?
Mostly Im angered at the way u have insulted gay people and women and whatever else u seem to wanna throw insults at. Perhaps if u had made your point without openly expressing your disgusting attitude to anyone who is not the same as u and basically being rude and disrespectfull to other people on this board then I might have taken your point and said fair enough.
Combat is not a politically correct activity. If you think that I am brutal and obscene, take a glimpse at the reality of combat. Anyone repulsed by me could not survive combat. THAT was the point. If faggots cannot stomach me, they cannot stomach combat.
Its clear though that u r that ignorant and pathetic u cant at least use the word gay instead of queer...that alone can be an insult!
Without knowing you, I cannot be familiar with your education and experience, and neither can you presume to be familiar with mine. In point of fact, I am VERY LIKELY to be both more educated and experienced in this world than you. You call ALL positions divergent to yours "ignorant"?
Im intrigued as to how being gay means u have no discipline...
ANYONE openly queer has demonstrated the lack of personal discipline requisite to function in the military. AS PER THE STATUS QUO, openly queer is unfit to serve. You want to serve, keep it in your pants. If you cannot submit to THAT requirement that repulses you, how can you set aside your reservation concerning the taking of life? How can you KILL when the moment comes? You think that men like me ENJOY killing? Your lack of understanding is pathetically naive! It is simply doing what MUST be done! It is a JOB, and part of the job requirement is a level of personal discipline that is beyond the comprehension of you!
...go back to wherever it is u came from and carry on with your military life-style and your pathetic way of thinking etc etc etc, coz it dosent really belong on a teen website aimed at advicing people rather than insulting them and basically behaving how u have...to put it bluntly FUCK OFF!
"You're cute when your angry! Wanna take it up the ass?" That offend you? If it did not, then we have nothing further to talk about! No one on a front line wants to be wondering if the soldier next to him is thinking the same sentiment. Combat is a brutal endeavor, and it does NOT suffer the weak, or the defective. It has NO tolerance for distraction. Anything which distracts from mission effectiveness MUST be eliminated.
Actually, I DO apologize for the last, but it seemed a necessary punctuation mark to communicate the concept to your closed mind. I am NOT a pedophile, and I want NOTHING to do (sexually) with a child... and with your blatant naivite, you definitely present yourself as an inexperienced child. Perhaps when you grow up, you might see things differently?
edit: I observe that the word ****** is INSTANTLY censored. How quaint. Please insert the word "queer".
[This message has been edited by thanatos (edited 17-08-2001).]
I'm gonna paint a big target on my back here.
In part, I agree with the Thanatos's. While the military still considers being openly gay a hinderence to military effectiveness it will have NO CHOICE but to be prejudicial in this respect. Thanatos has already said that the only thing to consider is military effectiveness, ANYONE can keep quiet and be accepted if they make the grade.
However if you are gay and enlist it would seem to be analogous to a black man walking into a KKK neighbourhood, the going is gonna be tough.
With regards to Thanatos's views, I would hazard a guess that he's a good deal older than the average age here, he's views remind me of my Grandfather's and my Father's hahaha (sorry, that would be funny if you could see me). People are shaped by the society they live in, and his seem very traditional and old fashioned. After a few more generations I think views such as his will be the very small exception rather than the rule.
Maybe at that time the military will reconsider it's policy.
Thanatos
You know fully well that the majority of users here are teenagers. Please tone down your language, it is not appropriate.
People will respect your point of view much more if you stop insulting them.
Did i read that right? You are asking Thanatos to tone down his language? Did you happen to read the posts preceeding his? I dont think anyone here is offended by such language as most use MUCH worse in their posts. You could at least have said something about the other posters using vulgar language throughout their posts..I think we can see, from your post, which side of the argument you are on here.
If you have a problem with teenagers reading naughty words or phrases I suggest you remove the ENTIRE sex forum.
OK .. Thanatos, as Lord of Little says, you're probably older than most of us, i'm 28, so you live in the dark ages with respect to your outlook on sexuality, gender and females.
The name Powerslave refers to an Iron Maiden track, who are a favourite metal band of mine <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/smile.gif">
I'd guess that the British Armed Forces has a different outlook, and a more mature and overall idealisitc attitude to deal with with these issues.
As for me having been deployed to active conflicts .. YES i have, and yes i consider myself a very experienced soldier, not as much as someone who's been serving longer than myself .. but experienced in comparison to most people.
What conflicts have the US been involved in recenently ... APART from the Gulf War??
And the occasional Blue on Blue ??
I've been involved in countless conflicts because there is far more troubles in Europe and worldwide. No games. No blanks. REAL war, get that wrong and your dead, not given a bollocking by the CO.
I'd be grateful if you could respect my opinions as i have respected everyone elses.
I thought that soldiers worldwide wouldn't diss each other and keep a war tally .. but i guess you Americans are on a ego trip of some sort, and whether i have a differing opinion or not doesnt mean i've experienced more or less conflicts than you.
War is the last resort for anyone, that's what we signed up for, but we shouldn't keep a scorecard on how many we've served in, or how many fatalities we've seen .. or inflicted.
Does it ??
Thank GOD i serve in Britain, and if your outdated and unacceptable views reflect that of the US Armed Forces then i'm extremely thankful i serve in the UK. <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/biggrin.gif">
One day you'll be as good as us .. one day <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/smile.gif">
Visit Alzaweb <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/smilie/guitarist.gif">
[This message has been edited by Powerslave (edited 17-08-2001).]