What the Don't Ask Don't Tell Report Really Says

Press coverage of the new Pentagon Don't Ask Don't Tell report suggests that large majorities of U.S. servicemen and women wouldn't mind the repeal of the military's current policy on gays. Don't believe it. What the report actually shows is that the military is deeply divided over the policy, both between the service branches and especially between those who have served in combat and those who haven't. Did you know that 59 percent of Marines who have served in combat say repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell would have a negative effect? And that 45 percent of Army respondents who have been in combat say the same thing? That is significant, not marginal, opposition.

Overall, the survey of 115,000 servicemen and women presents a mixed-to-positive reaction to the proposed repeal of the current policy. Seventeen percent of all service members say repeal would have a positive effect, while 21 percent say it would have a negative effect, 33 percent say it would have equally positive and negative effects, and 29 percent say it would have no effect.

But the picture is considerably different when you compare the opinions of service members who have and haven't been in combat. For example, the Pentagon study group asked the following question of respondents "who have never been deployed or haven't been in combat environment since September 11, 2001":

If Don't Ask, Don't tell is repealed and you are working with a service member in your immediate unit who has said he or she is gay or lesbian, how, if at all, would it affect your immediate unit's effectiveness at completing its mission on a day-to-day basis?

The answers are a mixed bag but suggest that there would be support for repeal of the current policy. Seventeen percent of all service members say repeal would have a positive effect, while 21 percent say it would have a negative effect; 33 percent say it would have equally positive and negative effects, and 29 percent say it would have no effect.

Then the Pentagon team asked service members "who have been deployed at some point and been in combat environment since September 11, 2001":

The differences are striking. Just 11 percent say repeal would have a positive effect, while 44 percent say it would have a negative effect. Twenty six percent of those surveyed say it would have equally positive and negative effects, and 19 percent say it would have no effect.

Break down the numbers by service branch, and the results are even more striking. Fifty-nine percent of Marines who have been in combat say repeal would have a negative effect, and just 11 percent say it would have no effect. Forty-five percent of Army respondents say it would have a negative effect. The opposition is less intense in the Navy and Air Force, where 35 percent and 41 percent say repeal would have a negative effect, but those are still significant minorities.

And these are large groups. According to the study, 70 percent of respondents are now or have been deployed, and 83 percent of them have been in a combat zone or an area where they received hostile fire pay. There is simply no way to argue that they overwhelmingly support repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell.

But repeal is what the president and many lawmakers want. And civilian control of the military is a bedrock principle of the U.S. government. If the president and Congress order service members to do something, then that's what they are going to do. But don't pretend they all think it's a good idea.

If DADT is repealed gay servicemen will have no reason to be discreet. They will be as promiscuous as they want to be. Since they score the lion's share of HIV, HIV may spread among the heterosexual population fighting on the battlefield when combat medics start digging around one bloody injury to another. Is the medic going to make sure he changes latex gloves for every soldier he attends in the heat of battle? Will he even tend to a soldier known to be openly homosexual?

Not to mention the drain on military healthcare system and all the other issues that go along with bunking in close quarters.

There were gays serving on my ship when I was in the Navy, and when they were “outed” for one reason or another, things didn’t go well for them. They were normally “removed” from the ship very quickly (for their own safety I assumed). I’m not saying it was right how they were treated, but it was reality.

I can only comment on what I know about from my experience. Living quarters/showers are cramped, even on big ships, and life on a ship is stressful. After getting off work, it was nice to be able to hang out and play cards or listen to music and not have to worry about being “scoped out” or whatever.

I tend to think of having gays openly serving as being about equal to having men/women living in the same living quarters. While there may be good intentions all around if men and women were berthed together, there WOULD be added stress, to the men, and the women. It’s simple biology.

Why subject our soldiers/airmen/sailors to more stress than they already have? The military shouldn’t be a social experiment. How long before two men have sex in a berthing area? How would you feel if two guys had sex in your HOME and you were unable to leave? There are so many reasons not to repeal DADT, and I can’t think of one good reason to do it.

I also have a real problem with politicians/media who always ask officers about it. They won’t be the ones who have to deal with it in their day to day working environment, at least not to the extent of the enlisted personel. Living conditions were cramped as a sailor, I can only imagine what life is like for an enlisted soldier in combat.

I will be saddened for our armed forces if DADT is repealed. I don’t consider myself a homophobe, but if others think I am, I won’t care, at all. I just feel from my experience that we don’t need to do this. It will make the military less than it is now, in many ways.

rant over...

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.