Hi Merc,
Let's assume you're serious in asking on what do I base my opinions of Sec Robert Gates.
If not, I leave it to you to Google "Robert Gates DADT" and sort it out from there.
Let's also assume that Gates is an intelligent man with sufficient experience and competence to understand and lead organizational change in the federal government.
If Gates
openly disagreed with the President-elect Obama about revoking DADT and could not affirmatively and honorably work towards it, he should have resigned in 2008.
If you don't buy that, it's yet another exhibit of GWB's shoddy performance by hiring an incompetent to lead the DOD.
Further, let's NOT assume I don't understand something of how management systems work, and I won't assume that you don't recognize when a manager is throwing up roadblocks to keep a change he/she opposes from occurring.
I refer you to my OP (post #1) about Gate's forcing an expansion of his study, and setting the date of the report after the midterm elections (12/1/10).
His doubling of the sample size was a bogus issue... ask a statistician the power of doubling the sample size in survey a large population... it smacks of political intrigue.
Should we really believe Gates was not aware of the balance of powers in the Senate, and the likely outcome of this November 2010 election.
Most everyone else was aware.
Here are some quotes regarding the Gates' DADT survey from the
U.S. Department of Defense News
Quote:
American Forces Press Service
*News Article
Survey Will Permit Informed Decisions, Official Says
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service
Quote:
WASHINGTON, July 9, 2010 – Survey responses on the possible repeal of the law that bans gays and lesbians from serving openly in the military will allow leaders to make informed decisions, Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell said today.
<snip>
|
And here are the first 11 sequential responses from members of the military in the Comments Section:
Quote:
Article is closed to new comments.
The opinions expressed in the following comments do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Department of Defense.
7/26/2010 10:23:03 AM
Not one question about whether the servicemember would follow orders if orders to integrate were given. One wonders why? Not one question about whether existing rules prohibiting public displays of affection or unwarranted sexual advances would adequately cover the situation. Not one question about whether the most qualified member of a unit would help save the country, even if they were gay. HHHmm, wonder if there is a hidden agenda?
- Triathlete, california
7/14/2010 3:29:28 AM
I don't think that a straight guy wants to share a shower with a gay guy anymore than a straight woman wants to share a public shower with a straight guy! It is just a fact that something will have to be done to assure more privacy.
- Denise, AL
7/12/2010 2:09:33 PM
I'm confused! Is the story really about what the Army is doing now to stay on mission with getting survey information from servicemembers? Or, is it shifting to shine a light on the Army is quick to catch when there has been a tremendousbreach of protocol?
- Anthony Lewis, DFAS
7/12/2010 9:46:29 AM
I have a powerfuld disdain for the fact that Congress appears to be ready to cram this down our throats prior to the end of the DoD assessment of the situation. I am, however, glad that we have venues for expressing our concerns. At least our senior leaders seem to care about us.
- MSgt Jack Padilla, Lackland AFB
7/11/2010 12:46:22 AM
I was very disappointed to read the survey sent to the members of the US military regarding DADT. Although you may have put a lot of time and thought into this survey, I suspect that you did not thoroughly vet it's content with LGBT individuals or organizations. There is a clear bias in the survey against the repeal of DADT. Using the word "if" instead of "when" undermines the entire process. I do hope you will revise the survey to more fairly represent the many LGBT members of the service who currently are serving and who have honorably served in the past.
- Robert Mason, Los Angeles, CA
7/10/2010 11:05:52 PM
This survey is an obvious sham, with the questions written to achieve the desired, closed-minded answers of the homophobes. Still, there are many who can't wait to believe the official results. Just remember, the secret to success is sincerity. Once you learn to fake that, you've got it made.
- John Rochat MD, Fort Bragg, CA
7/10/2010 8:45:19 PM
I urge you to pull the survey on DADT and find a polling company that will phase the questions in an objective many and in a way that solicits responses from leading questions.
- Michael , Yonkers NY
7/10/2010 7:49:45 PM
Mr. Secretary; as with General McChrystal, the job of the troops is to execute the law of the land and the orders and policies of the command structure. The idea of surveying the troops over a policy issue is akin to asking them if they should be deployed...they are in the service and are expected to follow the company line, agree or not. If they cannot live up to this standard, then they have no business wearing the U.S. uniform. Insert "person of color" of "female" or Muslim" and you would not even consider this procedure. I am embarrassed for the DoD, and only hope you heed the wants of more than 80% of our citizens. If our soldiers cannot get past this, I am sure there are those that can, and NO ONE is irreplaceable. Thank you- a concerned and proud Washington native.
- jeff milligan, las cruces, New Mexico
7/10/2010 6:06:32 PM
As noted in many of your own EEO policy documents, "What is offensive is in the “eyes of the beholder.”" Some of the questions asked, the words used, and the general tone of the DADT survey are offensive to many gays and lesbians, particularly those in uniform. It is repulsive for DoD to say that outside comments regarding this survey are inflammatory or misleading. Since DoD and the Services have said they will discharge those who out themselves in this review process, outside influences are not helpful, THEY ARE REQUIRED to speak for those who cannot speak for themselves. The advocacy groups have spoken, many with the input of gay servicemembers, and this survey was written with little apparent regard for the gay military personnel and their families who have been forced to serve in silence for 17 years.
- Richard L., Norfolk
7/10/2010 3:12:15 AM
None of the questions assumes that the participant might be gay or lesbian. Odd
- Ian Mac, London
|
|