Left, Right up or down?

[gallandof]

So I dont get too much into politics as far as news and the news paper are concerned I feel they are too biased. But I am always debating/talking with friends and family about politics or something or another because they are very interested in them. Alot of the time I dont fit into any of the "category" and half the time I dont understand what each one is.

So I come to you guys, whats the differences between the left/the right, republicans,democrats, liberals etc... and how do you know which one you are?


for example, when it comes to the dont ask dont tell policy, I feel that if a homosexual person wether male or female wants to join the service they should be able to vocalize their choices and express as long as they arent doing so in a disruptive or destructive manner. who cares if the other soldiers they are with arent comfortable thats their issues, not the gay persons. now if the gay person tries to "force themselves" on another then yes thats an issue but shouldnt be any more so than any other person in the military.

I'm not trying to stir up an argument or anything I am just interested in understanding politics and such more.

 

[copestag]

for your question as to the difference between right and left....... ask yourself this....... what would make the most sense and be best for the country..........youll find that neither side is anywhere near the answer....... so really there is no difference POLITICALLY... they both do the exact same thing... they just use different words to describe their approach to the same conclusion............

now as far as your opinion on gays in the military..... and your entire position is summarized in just one short statement...... "who cares if the other soldiers they are with arent comfortable thats their issues, not the gay persons"........ I got some bad news for you......... the ONLY thing that matters in this argument....... the one of whether gays should be open or not........ is the opinion of other soldiers........

NOTHING and I repeat NOTHING else matters....... the reception gay soldiers receive from straight soldiers is the ONLY consideration in whether or not to end DADT....... because if straight soldiers cant accept gay soldiers then they will not fight beside them........ and if they will not fight beside them then we no longer have a cohesive military unit.....you cannot force anyone to accept gays........ to put it bluntly...... thats gays issues... not the straight persons....... you cant force a person to like another persons beliefs or lifestyle.... and given the nature of military units....... its necessary to like the persons or at least respect the persons you are fighting beside........ if straights dont like or respect their gay unit members.... then at the very least that member.... and in all probabilty that unit .......will fail in battle...... PERIOD

so is sending units to battle that you know will fail a good idea?..... I guess we could just force the straights to believe what you believe and everything will be OK

note: straights and gays is used as descriptors since this is the only thing most mouthbreathers can understand

 

[Vihzel]

I wonder how smooth the transition went with having blacks and whites in the same combat units when it first started happening those many years ago. I wonder how smooth the transition went with allowing black children to go to schools that were whites only. There will be some issues but eventually... like how we see blacks and whites working together in the military today... it will become a non-issue.

More than 22 of the 26 countries that participate military in NATO allow gays to openly serve. Our closest allies allow gays to serve in the military, including Israel. I wonder what kind of problems they're having that would be of such high concern for the best military in the world?

 

[smacky]

for your question as to the difference between right and left....... ask yourself this....... what would make the most sense and be best for the country..........youll find that neither side is anywhere near the answer....... so really there is no difference POLITICALLY... they both do the exact same thing... they just use different words to describe their approach to the same conclusion............

now as far as your opinion on gays in the military..... and your entire position is summarized in just one short statement...... "who cares if the other soldiers they are with arent comfortable thats their issues, not the gay persons"........ I got some bad news for you......... the ONLY thing that matters in this argument....... the one of whether gays should be open or not........ is the opinion of other soldiers........

NOTHING and I repeat NOTHING else matters....... the reception gay soldiers receive from straight soldiers is the ONLY consideration in whether or not to end DADT....... because if straight soldiers cant accept gay soldiers then they will not fight beside them........ and if they will not fight beside them then we no longer have a cohesive military unit.....you cannot force anyone to accept gays........ to put it bluntly...... thats gays issues... not the straight persons....... you cant force a person to like another persons beliefs or lifestyle.... and given the nature of military units....... its necessary to like the persons or at least respect the persons you are fighting beside........ if straights dont like or respect their gay unit members.... then at the very least that member.... and in all probabilty that unit .......will fail in battle...... PERIOD

so is sending units to battle that you know will fail a good idea?..... I guess we could just force the straights to believe what you believe and everything will be OK

note: straights and gays is used as descriptors since this is the only thing most mouthbreathers can understand

Although I agree with you, I know certain members on this forum that would say gays have the right to enter, whether the soldiers like it or not. It's like the mosque issue, it doesn't matter what the 9/11 families think, the Muslims have a right through the constitution.

 

[copestag]

well to be correct and more direct to the point........ they do not have the right to join ...... nobody has a right to join the military....... they do however have the right not to be discriminated against...... and I certainly wouldnt be the one to keep them out based on their sexual prefs..... my only point is.... if its going to make the military less effective or impede their ability to keep me and my family safe....... then counter to the above thought.... who cares if gays arent comfortable thats their issues not the straight persons..... if they can make the transition without effecting the military cohesiveness....... then I could care less if they are open or not.... it doesnt effect me

so to make my point clear:

disrupts military ability to protect me: couldnt care less if gays want rights

doesnt disrupt military ability to protect me: couldnt care less period

 

[Martimus]

So I come to you guys, whats the differences between the left/the right, republicans,democrats, liberals etc... and how do you know which one you are?

Left... right... up... down... in this context they are basically little more than points on a compass. In modern politics the division between the politics of the left, politics of the middle, and politics of the right is pretty much semantics. As much as I dread to say this it's really become an "us vs them" mindset. IMO I honestly don't think that there are more than a few politicians left that truly give a darn what the American people want. My thought is that they all have their personal agendas, their public agenda's, and their hidden agenda's. And in only a few cases are any of these agenda's compatible with what their constituents really want.

for example, when it comes to the dont ask dont tell policy, I feel that if a homosexual person wether male or female wants to join the service they should be able to vocalize their choices and express as long as they arent doing so in a disruptive or destructive manner. who cares if the other soldiers they are with arent comfortable thats their issues, not the gay persons. now if the gay person tries to "force themselves" on another then yes thats an issue but shouldnt be any more so than any other person in the military.

The "don't ask, don't tell" policy was a joke when it was first implemented and it's gotten no better over time. The fact is that all it did was force the folks that it effected to keep their sexual preferences to themselves. To me this is one of the many defense policies that needs to be dumped. It's archaic and ill conceived. That said I also believe that the military needs to lift the ban on female soldiers functioning in direct combat roles. The Israeli Army has, over the years, proven that female soldiers are as good as their male counterparts in many combat roles. There are a few areas, however, where segregation of the sexes has its advantages. For example it might not be prudent to put female soldiers on a Submarine for months at a time with a bunch of male submariners.

 

[Vihzel]

There are a few areas, however, where segregation of the sexes has its advantages. For example it might not be prudent to put female soldiers on a Submarine for months at a time with a bunch of male submariners.

I'm sure the male submariners wouldn't mind... as long as the female kept her mouth shut about anything that happened down there.

 

[Martimus]

I'm sure the male submariners wouldn't mind... as long as the female kept her mouth shut about anything that happened down there.

Yup... on the other hand the Navy has enough of a problem already with female sailors on surface ships.

Center for Military Readiness | Women in Combat

That said it looks like it may just happen...

 

[Bob Maxey]

I am a strong conservitive. That once meant being a republican, but that party has changed. I'll except right wing.

I believe in personal responsibility, a smaller and quite limited government, capitalism and honestly free markets, individual and personal liberty, traditional American values and strong national defense.

I believe that liberals are a real problem and I believe Obama was the worse possible choice for president. Not because he is black, but because he has zero experience.

I am proud to say that I respect, read, and follow Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter. By the way, many on this list likely hate Limbaugh, Coulter, and the rest of our conservitive tribe. So feel free to flame me.

Bob

 

[n0ct3m]

I don't know what the hell I am. I wish I did though. All I do know is that I think both sides have come down to nothing more than spending all their time insulting the other. God I wish they would quit their pickering, whining, moaning and pointing fingers and just do their job for once. Or is that their job?

 

[Martimus]

I believe that liberals are a real problem and I believe Obama was the worse possible choice for president. Not because he is black, but because he has zero experience.

Sadly we had zero real choices in the last election! Obama had no experience and McCain flip flops more than a freshly caught fish in a boat.

 

[ElasticNinja]

Sadly we had zero real choices in the last election! Obama had no experience and McCain flip flops more than a freshly caught fish in a boat.

Not to mention our intelligible frend PaLiN

 

[Martimus]

Not to mention our intelligible frend PaLiN

Good idea! Lets not mention her!

 

[hakr100]

Good idea! Lets not mention her!

Aren't Palin, Sharron Angle, Michelle Bachmann and that intellectual GOP candidate from Delaware the future of the GOP? I sure hope so.