I came across two different pieces on line that go to the heart of documenting the idiocy of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. The first is an op-ed in the Washington Post written by a former service member who was expelled under DADT and then goes on to work as a civilian contractor doing the same job. The other is an opinion piece in the Tucson Weekly by a former crew member of a submarine who looks at the loss to the Navy when an officer was expelled due to DADT. The first describes a common occurrence in this area with a huge military presence: discharged service members discharged under DADT or those who do not re-enlist due to the policy go on to work for defense contractors performing nearly the same jobs but at frequently much, much higher salaries (I have at least a dozen friends who have done this, in fact). The net result? The loss of honorable and qualified personnel and increased costs to replace the lost personnel either by training new recruits or hiring defense contractors to take up the slack. As readers of this blog know, in my opinion, supporters of DADT in the final analysis care nothing about military readiness or unit cohesiveness. Rather, it's all about keeping LGBT Americans inferior under the laws, both civil and military. Here are some highlights from the Washington Post column:*
By telling someone that I am gay, I had violated federal law -- a law that the military's leadership has finally acknowledged is wrong. "Speaking for myself and myself only, it is my personal belief that allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly would be the right thing to do," Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said before the Senate Armed Services Committee last week.
*
It's more than just the right thing to do. It's needed to keep our country safe, and it will not disrupt discipline in our armed forces. How do I know? Because after I came out, I accepted a position doing the same job that I did when I was enlisted.
*
It turned out that my exact skill set, gained through Air Force training, was in high demand with defense contractors. Within three weeks of my discharge, global contractor KBR hired me to go back to Iraq as a radio repair technician. (KBR knew that I was gay and had received an honorable discharge.)
*
Within one month of my arrival in Iraq, a former chief master sergeant, now retired and working for KBR as well, sent me to Bagram air base in Afghanistan to manage its technical operations. There, I worked with three former servicemembers whom I had served with while on active duty -- except now I was working with them as an openly gay contractor. None of them thought my sexual orientation posed a problem for our mission. One Army sergeant whom I was working with was particularly confused by the policy. "I can't believe they are still discharging people for being gay," he said. "Don't they know we need everyone we can get in this fight?"
*
The fear of disturbing good order in the military is a myth. Within a month of my return from Afghanistan last June, a retired master sergeant asked me to come work for him at Andrews Air Force Base. I ended up working with two former military supervisors and one former airman whom I once supervised -- all now contractors. There was no mistake that I was an openly gay man working on a military installation. I even drove around on Andrews in a car with decorations advocating for the repeal of "don't ask, don't tell."
*
I'm lucky that I continue to get job offers without seeking them. This tells me that our military is stretched thin and that the Defense Department is trying to make up for the shortfall by constantly reinforcing our troops with civilian contractors, most of whom have served before -- including the gay ones. As a contractor in Afghanistan, I was earning nearly twice what I would have made had I still been enlisted. But it's not about the money.
*
That's right, the author is now paid twice as much for doing the same job as a civilian contractor. And the service members he works with as a civilian employee could care less that he's gay. How does Elaine Donnelly justify such financial idiocy? Clearly, religious based bigotry is the real issue at hand. The second piece in the Tucson Weekly likewise looks at the loss of skill that DADT causes. Here are some highlights:
*
I’m chiming in on the "Don’t Ask Don’t Tell" debate, because I served on a nuclear submarine with a guy who got kicked out of the Navy for being gay. His name was Chief Petty Officer Timothy McVeigh (he later became a Senior Chief) and he was a member of the crew of the USS Asheville, the Los Angeles class fast-attack submarine I first reported to in 1993. He was one of the more experienced members of our crew. He was especially respected for his knowledge of shipboard operations and ability to function in stressful situations, of which there were many.
*
Years after I transferred off the Asheville, I picked up a copy of USA Today and saw McVeigh on the cover. He had been outed at a base in Hawaii for being gay and was being kicked out.
*
Submarines only allow men onboard, and they spend months on end together underwater. Nobody had any problem with McVeigh while we did all this, and not only did we work together; we were proud to work with him. We looked to him for guidance, and the Navy lost that guidance when they kicked him out because he happened to love men instead of women.
I hear all of this shit about how gay people in the ranks will mess everything up. It’s bullshit. War and the military are not games. It’s about every person doing their job well and about staying alive. This “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” debate is about machismo and homophobia — basically, soldiers and sailors and airmen don’t want to sleep next to or work with men or women with a different sexual preference than theirs. Replace the word “gay” with “black” or “Native American,” and the debate becomes offensive.
*
The question now becomes whether or not Congress will grow the balls to ignore the lies and whining of the Christianists who are in essence behind DADT. Time will tell.
*
It's more than just the right thing to do. It's needed to keep our country safe, and it will not disrupt discipline in our armed forces. How do I know? Because after I came out, I accepted a position doing the same job that I did when I was enlisted.
*
It turned out that my exact skill set, gained through Air Force training, was in high demand with defense contractors. Within three weeks of my discharge, global contractor KBR hired me to go back to Iraq as a radio repair technician. (KBR knew that I was gay and had received an honorable discharge.)
*
Within one month of my arrival in Iraq, a former chief master sergeant, now retired and working for KBR as well, sent me to Bagram air base in Afghanistan to manage its technical operations. There, I worked with three former servicemembers whom I had served with while on active duty -- except now I was working with them as an openly gay contractor. None of them thought my sexual orientation posed a problem for our mission. One Army sergeant whom I was working with was particularly confused by the policy. "I can't believe they are still discharging people for being gay," he said. "Don't they know we need everyone we can get in this fight?"
*
The fear of disturbing good order in the military is a myth. Within a month of my return from Afghanistan last June, a retired master sergeant asked me to come work for him at Andrews Air Force Base. I ended up working with two former military supervisors and one former airman whom I once supervised -- all now contractors. There was no mistake that I was an openly gay man working on a military installation. I even drove around on Andrews in a car with decorations advocating for the repeal of "don't ask, don't tell."
*
I'm lucky that I continue to get job offers without seeking them. This tells me that our military is stretched thin and that the Defense Department is trying to make up for the shortfall by constantly reinforcing our troops with civilian contractors, most of whom have served before -- including the gay ones. As a contractor in Afghanistan, I was earning nearly twice what I would have made had I still been enlisted. But it's not about the money.
*
That's right, the author is now paid twice as much for doing the same job as a civilian contractor. And the service members he works with as a civilian employee could care less that he's gay. How does Elaine Donnelly justify such financial idiocy? Clearly, religious based bigotry is the real issue at hand. The second piece in the Tucson Weekly likewise looks at the loss of skill that DADT causes. Here are some highlights:
*
I’m chiming in on the "Don’t Ask Don’t Tell" debate, because I served on a nuclear submarine with a guy who got kicked out of the Navy for being gay. His name was Chief Petty Officer Timothy McVeigh (he later became a Senior Chief) and he was a member of the crew of the USS Asheville, the Los Angeles class fast-attack submarine I first reported to in 1993. He was one of the more experienced members of our crew. He was especially respected for his knowledge of shipboard operations and ability to function in stressful situations, of which there were many.
*
Years after I transferred off the Asheville, I picked up a copy of USA Today and saw McVeigh on the cover. He had been outed at a base in Hawaii for being gay and was being kicked out.
*
Submarines only allow men onboard, and they spend months on end together underwater. Nobody had any problem with McVeigh while we did all this, and not only did we work together; we were proud to work with him. We looked to him for guidance, and the Navy lost that guidance when they kicked him out because he happened to love men instead of women.
I hear all of this shit about how gay people in the ranks will mess everything up. It’s bullshit. War and the military are not games. It’s about every person doing their job well and about staying alive. This “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” debate is about machismo and homophobia — basically, soldiers and sailors and airmen don’t want to sleep next to or work with men or women with a different sexual preference than theirs. Replace the word “gay” with “black” or “Native American,” and the debate becomes offensive.
*
The question now becomes whether or not Congress will grow the balls to ignore the lies and whining of the Christianists who are in essence behind DADT. Time will tell.
No comments:
Post a Comment