View Full Version : DADT PASSES
Well it looks like Don't Ask Don't Tell is going away. The military is entering new territory here. Makes me wander what my new reality is going to be when the POTUS signs this bill. Hard to say how I feel about this measure. I guess as long as Gays complete the mission they are good to go. Then again if I catch a gay soldier in the act with their partner do I have to turn them in for sodomy? Will this Act change the UCMJ? Are sodomy and adultery going away as prosecutable offenses? If a male can sodomize another male for pleasure, then can a male can have carnal knowledge with a willing married female? Where do you draw the line? :confused:
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/12/18/cheers-and-jeers-greet-senate-vote-to-repeal-dadt/
LowSpeed_HighDrag
12-18-10, 21:52
**** yes turn em in. A man can be charged for willfully sodomization of his own wife under the UCMJ, and I'll damn sure turn it around on them.
I guess "two to a pisser" will never mean the same again lol...
My read is that this will have minimum to no effect on the military.
Because frankly, it was never about allowing all these individuals who choose to live a homosexual lifestyle to serve their country. It was all about drama queening.
It was all about drama queening
What does that mean in military context?
My read is that this will have minimum to no effect on the military.
Because frankly, it was never about allowing all these individuals who choose to live a homosexual lifestyle to serve their country. It was all about drama queening.
It may have been about drama queening but we have to deal with it now. I wonder if a single straight soldier will have to share a barracks room with a gay soldier? This law is opening Pandora's Box. The young soldiers say it doesn't matter but they probably lack the experience to make a good judgment on the matter. I guess time will tell.
QuietShootr
12-18-10, 23:46
It kind of saddens me to know that I've signed my last enlistment document.
Unless the Army radically turns their shit around, or the Marine Corps starts accepting older PS from other branches, I'm afraid this is about it for me.
But enough is enough.
It may have been about drama queening but we have to deal with it now. I wonder if a single straight soldier will have to share a barracks room with a gay soldier? This law is opening Pandora's Box. The young soldiers say it doesn't matter but they probably lack the experience to make a good judgment on the matter. I guess time will tell.
I don't think you get my point. I would bet that the amount of truly gay male soldiers is infinitely small.
Homosexual behavior still violates UCMJ. As does certain hetero behavior.
Thousands and thousands of the flaming gays that you guys are all frightened of are NOT going to suddenly knock down the doors to military recruiters everywhere. They are going to continue to live in their own sub-culture that, obtw, is antithetical to military service.
The non-flaming ones you still won't know about. Doing away with DADT just takes the target off the .mil's back.
It may have been about drama queening but we have to deal with it now. I wonder if a single straight soldier will have to share a barracks room with a gay soldier? This law is opening Pandora's Box. The young soldiers say it doesn't matter but they probably lack the experience to make a good judgment on the matter. I guess time will tell.
Dumb question, but... On my last military deployment, I shared a barracks room with female soldiers. There even was a married couple who shared a bed. And probably un-married couples who shared other things.
Don't recall that causing the heat death of the universe, or spontaneous nuclear fission. In fact, we had one sexually related issue that rose to the level of command attention and that had nothing to do with the shared living quarters.
Am still waiting for the incredibly destructive influence this had on anything that really mattered. And we had particularly shitty leadership, obtw.
LowSpeed_HighDrag
12-19-10, 01:54
I smell PowerPoints already in the making....
The "don't tell" part of it doesn't seem like such a big deal. There are plenty of homosexual service members already, and they already know who it's cool to tell and who not to.
The "don't ask" part going away... that now means that any service member could be ordered to state their sexual alignment and make it known to whomever. I can see this being used to "out" people in awkward (i.e. homophobic) environments where they'd otherwise never have caused any morale or discipline problems.
This thread raises a good point about sodomy under UCMJ. We all know that male/female hookups happen in the military all the time. There's already a culture and command structure with some common sense (usually, lol) that can deal with hetero sexual drama.
Just remember that at one time, racially integrated units were forbidden. Integration did not come easily to the military. Many blanket parties were thrown and many careers were sabotaged. I suspect we're about to see a similar course of events.
FromMyColdDeadHand
12-19-10, 08:58
I think the major issue, at least from what I've seen in civy life, is that being gay goes from being the sin that dare not say its name to the lifestyle that won't shut up. I think that there are different actors and objectives here.
You have people that want to serve their country and happen to be homosexual. Then you have the activists that sign up for the whole LGBTQIA (Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, questioning, intersex, and asexual) agenda. The first people are vegetarians, the alphabet crew are vegans. You don't want to eat meat, most people are going to be respectful of your choice. Vegans are just a pain in the ass since it has gone from a dietary thing to a political statement. Free the butter!!!
That's been my concern about this whole queer to clear (gay to OK? Looking for something that rhymes) is that you get sold gay Navy SEALs and lesbian Arab translators and what you get is creepy guys in dresses, he/shes in various states of dong-ness and a general state-sanctioned attack on organized religion. You can't re-gift that crap. It's like being for civil rights and getting stuck with paying slavery reparations at the same time. You think how bad can it be getting some interior designers and female golfers in the military- and you are stuck with the whole short bus of short curcuited sexuality- that is now a protected class.
I really don't care. Gay guys are like Cub's fans to me- I'm not going to join your team, it seems God has thing in for you, and the media loves you. Lesbianism I don't know what to think of, I need to watch a lot more of it.
As to LGBTQIA, I never know why they leave the two 'P's off for polygamy and prostitution?
montanadave
12-19-10, 10:29
I really don't care. Gay guys are like Cub's fans to me- I'm not going to join your team, it seems God has thing in for you, and the media loves you. Lesbianism I don't know what to think of, I need to watch a lot more of it.
While I don't necessarily share all of your views on this issue, this synopsis is absolutely brilliant. :laugh:
Army Chief
12-19-10, 11:33
I think the major issue, at least from what I've seen in civy life, is that being gay goes from being the sin that dare not say its name to the lifestyle that won't shut up. I think that there are different actors and objectives here.
You have people that want to serve their country and happen to be homosexual. Then you have the activists that sign up for the whole LGBTQIA (Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, questioning, intersex, and asexual) agenda. The first people are vegetarians, the alphabet crew are vegans. You don't want to eat meat, most people are going to be respectful of your choice. Vegans are just a pain in the ass since it has gone from a dietary thing to a political statement. Free the butter!!!
That's been my concern about this whole queer to clear (gay to OK? Looking for something that rhymes) is that you get sold gay Navy SEALs and lesbian Arab translators and what you get is creepy guys in dresses, he/shes in various states of dong-ness and a general state-sanctioned attack on organized religion. You can't re-gift that crap. It's like being for civil rights and getting stuck with paying slavery reparations at the same time. You think how bad can it be getting some interior designers and female golfers in the military- and you are stuck with the whole short bus of short curcuited sexuality- that is now a protected class.
I really don't care. Gay guys are like Cub's fans to me- I'm not going to join your team, it seems God has thing in for you, and the media loves you. Lesbianism I don't know what to think of, I need to watch a lot more of it.
As to LGBTQIA, I never know why they leave the two 'P's off for polygamy and prostitution?
Did you happen to stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night, by chance? =]
AC
Soldiers don't care if their room mates are engaged in heterosexual activities. They do care about homosexual activities. Homosexual activities disrupt the good order and discipline of the unit. The only sexual activity more disruptive is leaders engaging in sexual behavior with their subordinates. It all boils down to Good order and discipline of the unit in the end. Any distractions that don't have anything to do with the mission are not tolerated and have to go. That is why over 60% of the combat arms guys said they didn't want the repeal.
What was your question and what type of unit were you in on your last trip to the CZ?
Dumb question, but... On my last military deployment, I shared a barracks room with female soldiers. There even was a married couple who shared a bed. And probably un-married couples who shared other things.
Don't recall that causing the heat death of the universe, or spontaneous nuclear fission. In fact, we had one sexually related issue that rose to the level of command attention and that had nothing to do with the shared living quarters.
Am still waiting for the incredibly destructive influence this had on anything that really mattered. And we had particularly shitty leadership, obtw.
Lesbianism I don't know what to think of, I need to watch a lot more of it.
Classic quote right here folks. I might have to use this in training meetings if the subject comes up.:big_boss::laugh:
theblackknight
12-19-10, 12:19
I smell PowerPoints already in the making....
You shut your damn mouth! You know its gonna be another series of clickfest Marinenet classes about EO that win be tacked on the the already retarded list of annual "training". As if a 2 hour long powerpoint class about bbq safety and the "100 days of high risk" summer bullshit wasnt retarded enough.
Belmont31R
12-19-10, 12:23
Soldiers don't care if their room mates are engaged in heterosexual activities. They do care about homosexual activities. Homosexual activities disrupt the good order and discipline of the unit. The only sexual activity more disruptive is leaders engaging in sexual behavior with their subordinates. It all boils down to Good order and discipline of the unit in the end. Any distractions that don't have anything to do with the mission are not tolerated and have to go. That is why over 60% of the combat arms guys said they didn't want the repeal.
What was your question and what type of unit were you in on your last trip to the CZ?
Part of the reason combat arms are all males is they don't want relationships getting in the way of the mission or soldiers doing stupid shit to save their BF/GF or whoever it is they "love" in times of danger.
Belmont31R
12-19-10, 12:24
You shut your damn mouth! You know its gonna be another series of clickfest Marinenet classes about EO that win be tacked on the the already retarded list of annual "training". As if a 2 hour long powerpoint class about bbq safety and the "100 days of high risk" summer bullshit wasnt retarded enough.
We spent more time in mandatory power point classes than on the range. Pretty sad, and I don't miss that BS for a minute.
LowSpeed_HighDrag
12-19-10, 12:32
You shut your damn mouth! You know its gonna be another series of clickfest Marinenet classes about EO that win be tacked on the the already retarded list of annual "training". As if a 2 hour long powerpoint class about bbq safety and the "100 days of high risk" summer bullshit wasnt retarded enough.
LMAO. Every wednesday spent in a theater learning about why gay jokes are bad, why punching a male friend is now domestic abuse, and why you should never drink around people of the same sex OR opposites sex because now EVERYONE will date rape you. Dont even mention the line of 75 guys at the one working admin computer trying to figure out how to log on to MarineNet and click through 700 pages of gay nonsense....only to find out later that MOL was down that day and none of it posted to your training.
Its nice to know that while our brothers are dying, we will be spending more time abolishing gay jokes than training our troops for combat.
Belmont31R
12-19-10, 12:37
LMAO. Every wednesday spent in a theater learning about why gay jokes are bad, why punching a male friend is now domestic abuse, and why you should never drink around people of the same sex OR opposites sex because now EVERYONE will date rape you. Dont even mention the line of 75 guys at the one working admin computer trying to figure out how to log on to MarineNet and click through 700 pages of gay nonsense....only to find out later that MOL was down that day and none of it posted to your training.
Its nice to know that while our brothers are dying, we will be spending more time abolishing gay jokes than training our troops for combat.
Ha we had two cases of bro-rape in my unit in Germany. Both times the victim was passed out from drinking, and both times it was their room mates. One oral and one anal.
Part of the reason combat arms are all males is they don't want relationships getting in the way of the mission or soldiers doing stupid shit to save their BF/GF or whoever it is they "love" in times of danger.
How about putting the females and gay men together, and also putting the straight men and lesbians together?
Lesbianism I don't know what to think of, I need to watch a lot more of it.
In powerpoint-ese I believe this could be a real Force Multiplier.
I'm waiting to pass judgement on this until I see the first quality senior NCO or officer lose rank and/or command because some incompetent idiot underneath them who happens to be in doubt about their sexuality claim they were "discriminated against".
Nowhere has this measure expected to reduce cost (it will increase cost - an influx of new potential dependents, and the door wide open to discrimination suits), or improve combat effectiveness (what a quaint concept, I guess I lack the sophistication of elitists who will never see combat), or improve the quality of warfighter our military has to offer.
Thousands and thousands of the flaming gays that you guys are all frightened of are NOT going to suddenly knock down the doors to military recruiters everywhere. They are going to continue to live in their own sub-culture that, obtw, is antithetical to military service.
I've never been in the military, but I'd be more worried about the few politically motivated homosexuals, the Bradley Mannings, and their teams of lawyers making every aspect of military life a legal battleground. I think it's just as unrealistic to think there aren't those who loathe our military and would love to destroy it.
I, for one, am not opposed to homosexuals serving openly because I want to punish them, but because everything thing I know tells me it could be harmful to the overall effectiveness of the military.
If the military leaders we pay to run things say, honestly, that homosexuals serving openly won't hinder effectiveness, I'd accept that.
I wonder how many times you all will heard "your just doing this cuz I'm gay!". We have a woman at work and anytime ANYTIME she gets in trouble or looks to get in trouble it's always a black thing with her.
LowSpeed_HighDrag
12-19-10, 18:24
I wonder how many times you all will heard "your just doing this cuz I'm gay!". We have a woman at work and anytime ANYTIME she gets in trouble or looks to get in trouble it's always a black thing with her.
Exactly. Give ANYONE an excuse to work less and get out of trouble and they will take it. I feel sorry for you EO reps out there, get ready for some long nights of paperwork.
I think this is something that probably should have been done, but not in the middle of a god damned war.
I feel sorry for you EO reps out there, get ready for some long nights of paperwork.
Lol. I don't, make them earn that extra point on their eval. :D
variablebinary
12-22-10, 05:55
Serve, and STFU. Simple concept. Doesn't matter if you like slits or dicks. Follow orders, do your job, don't get killed in the process.
A: This was never about gays serving. This is about gays queening openly and getting attention and "accepted", which has nothing to do with serving.
B: I expect nearly a 1:1 ratio of intel briefs and queer tolerance death by PowerPoint sessions in 2011. Yay?
C: The military will incur hundreds of millions in lawsuit costs due to every homo from here to Greenwich village suing the USA military for harassment, discrimination, and Tricare not springing for Crixivan.
The real fun is going to be in the Marine Corps. That branch is going to implode faster than the Army over this.
Magic_Salad0892
12-22-10, 06:00
I love fags. But seriously. This is going to get REALLY stupid, REALLY fast.
I am reminded of the soap beating scene in Full Metal Jacket when a crew of homophobes find out that their buddy prefers a cockmeat sandwich, over a tuna taco.
*cringe*
Most gay rights organizations didn't realize that DADT was also PROTECTING them.
Proposed headline:
"Liberal left takes over military by..."
You get the idea.
I hate how threads like this can go but I am going to comment anyway.
As a civilian a part of me is happy that this went away and a part of me is worried.
I have a number of friends who have served in the military in all branches. A couple of them are what I kindly refer to as "queer as a 3 dollar bill" By that I mean they would never even look at a woman. However they also don't "act gay". One served in Iraq 1 and the other never saw combat.
Both however lived in constant fear of being outed somehow. They never hit on fellow servicemen, never acted inappropriately, and never did anything to cause trouble.(Sexually at least)
So for people like them I believe this is a good thing. And I have the feeling that most people here would agree...
Now where I am worried is the people who want to make a political statement. The "queens" so to speak. And I think that is what most people in the service are also worried about. Those people are the ones who will cause moral problems and issues within units.
I think DADT was put in place specifically for these exact situations. The problem with it was that it caused the group my friends fit into to live in constant fear while it gave the second group a platform to sue from.
Complication
12-22-10, 09:22
A: This was never about gays serving. This is about gays queening openly and getting attention and "accepted", which has nothing to do with serving.
It kinda was. That's like saying a straight guy is "straighting it up" if he has a photo of his gf in his pocket or who, when asked by his buddy what he's doing on leave, says "going home to see my girl." Gays aren't going to be allowed to "queer it up" any more than straight service members are allowed to "whatever it up" beyond regs and good conduct. The repeal of DADT doesn't require them to disclose their sexuality it just means they won't get discharged if they do. I can promise you that someone prancing around shouting "I'm queer, I'm queer!" is not going to happen.
The real fun is going to be in the Marine Corps. That branch is going to implode faster than the Army over this.
What I find hilarious is all you guys who are so pro-military and then turn around like this and display zero confidence in our military's professionalism.
Will there be problems? Sure. Will people get over it? Yes.
Will there be people disciplined for harassment? Yes. Is that a problem? No. They should be disciplined. Just like anyone harassing someone because they're black, hispanic, asian, female, whatever. UCMJ. If you don't like it, you shouldn't have signed up. Following orders and conducting yourself professionally is not subject to your petty biases.
It kinda was. That's like saying a straight guy is "straighting it up" if he has a photo of his gf in his pocket or who, when asked by his buddy what he's doing on leave, says "going home to see my girl." Gays aren't going to be allowed to "queer it up" any more than straight service members are allowed to "whatever it up" beyond regs and good conduct. The repeal of DADT doesn't require them to disclose their sexuality it just means they won't get discharged if they do. I can promise you that someone prancing around shouting "I'm queer, I'm queer!" is not going to happen.
What I find hilarious is all you guys who are so pro-military and then turn around like this and display zero confidence in our military's professionalism.
Will there be problems? Sure. Will people get over it? Yes.
Will there be people disciplined for harassment? Yes. Is that a problem? No. They should be disciplined. Just like anyone harassing someone because they're black, hispanic, asian, female, whatever. UCMJ. If you don't like it, you shouldn't have signed up. Following orders and conducting yourself professionally is not subject to your petty biases.
People rightfully getting disciplined for harassment is not going to be an issue, and I highly doubt that anyone posting in this thread has a problem with that.
Complication
12-22-10, 09:50
People rightfully getting disciplined for harassment is not going to be an issue, and I highly doubt that anyone posting in this thread has a problem with that.
I question whether everyone in this thread would consider harassment of gays "real" harassment. But complaining that someone is going to get wrongly railroaded (which I agree will be unfortunate) is like complaining that people in the military might get shot or killed. If you think the military can dispense discipline and justice perfectly, you're living in a fantasy world.
It's going to happen. It will be regrettable, unfortunate, and infuriating when it does happen. But "doing it 100% right every time always without exception or ****up" is not a metric the military (or any other organization on the planet) uses. Nor should it be. If that were the standard by which the military implemented something or not, there would be no rifle, body armor, or vehicle fit for service. No new tactics or technology would ever be approved, and we'd fight with stone-age tools.
Driving to work is not 100% safe. People die on the roads every day. And when it happens, it completely sucks. But no one would say "Hey, let's get rid of all the cars on the planet" because of that.
I question whether everyone in this thread would consider harassment of gays "real" harassment. .
Lets try some other versions.
I question whether everyone in this thread would consider harassment of blacks "real" harassment.
I question whether everyone in this thread would consider harassment of Christians "real" harassment.
I question whether everyone in this thread would consider harassment of Indians "real" harassment.
Yep. Still real harassment no matter how you spell it.
Complication
12-22-10, 09:59
Oh, I agree. It's just hard to believe that those who are convinced that now M4s are going to come in hot pink are going to look at a case where some PFC gets hospitalized because he let slip to his platoon that he has a boyfriend are going to look at that situation and go "I certainly hope the guys who did that go to jail."
RogerinTPA
12-22-10, 10:09
It may have been about drama queening but we have to deal with it now. I wonder if a single straight soldier will have to share a barracks room with a gay soldier? This law is opening Pandora's Box. The young soldiers say it doesn't matter but they probably lack the experience to make a good judgment on the matter. I guess time will tell.
Personally, I never thought I'd see this day.:mad: ****in lame duck Dems snuck this one in, where it would have never passed in the new congress. I sure hope the straight guys have the option to OPT OUT in sharing a room with one.
Gutshot John
12-22-10, 10:52
This was going to happen eventually. It's hard to totally blame Democrats when a lot of the votes came from Republicans.
At least this way it's not done suddenly and all at once by a court order and instead there is a measured process by which it gets implemented with combat units being the last ones.
Homosexuals should have every right to serve their country without lying about who/what they are which among other things creates a potential security vulnerability.
Those that conform and continue an unofficial DADT policy will be the norm. Those that pull the "drama queen" nonsense will have problems but then I think they know that. My sense is that like women and blacks before them the overwhelming majority will be professional.
Smuckatelli
12-22-10, 10:54
What was your question and what type of unit were you in on your last trip to the CZ?
Where that question come from?
Where that question come from?
It was a response to 120MM.
The good thing about the U.S. Army is that you learn to conform rather quickly. I tines pulling K.P. or some other shit detail drums conformity home real quick. The last thing you want to do is stand out for the wrong reasons. Problem children and leadership challenges are the first ones to get sent to the outpost assignments. So you don't want to be "that guy" in the platoon because you know that you will get stuck walking point nearly permanently.
What I worry about is how the troops will act in garrison. We have been at war for nearly ten years now. The ten years before that we were deploying for peace enforcement/keeping missions. We have a whole generation of soldiers that have never served in a peace time army. Very few soldiers remember the challenges of a peace time army. The main challenge was keeping your soldiers out of trouble. Soldiers in a peace time army don't have much to focus on except partying and what ever hobbies they may have. Sooner or later we will leave Iraq and Afghanistan. When that day comes we will have an Army full of combat veterans bored out of their minds and looking for the next thrill. This is when interpersonal relationships really become important.
I still remember what happened at Fort Campbell when some drunk soldiers got in a fight. The soldier that won was suspected of being gay. he soldier that lost was harassed by his buddies for getting his ass kicked by a fag. Well later that night the sore loser exacted his revenge and PFC Barry Winchell was beat to death with a baseball bat. The soldiers that committed the crime were court martialed. The post Commander was blamed for his soldiers acts (http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/people/w/barry_l_winchell/index.html.
This is a worse case scenario precautionary tale and it was 11 years ago. There are many more examples I could use. I just hope today's young soldiers are more excepting of gays.
VooDoo6Actual
12-22-10, 12:55
C: The military will incur hundreds of millions in lawsuit costs due to every homo from here to Greenwich village suing the USA military for harassment, discrimination, and Tricare not springing for Crixivan.
The real fun is going to be in the Marine Corps. That branch is going to implode faster than the Army over this.
THIS.
The_War_Wagon
12-22-10, 14:20
I'm looking forward to snappier uniforms and peppier music in future parades. :rolleyes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfGTm_viXPs
GermanSynergy
12-22-10, 19:27
If Clinton implemented the much hated (by the left) DADT, and Obama has it repealed, does that make Clinton a bigot?
I question whether everyone in this thread would consider harassment of gays "real" harassment. But complaining that someone is going to get wrongly railroaded (which I agree will be unfortunate) is like complaining that people in the military might get shot or killed. If you think the military can dispense discipline and justice perfectly, you're living in a fantasy world.
It's going to happen. It will be regrettable, unfortunate, and infuriating when it does happen. But "doing it 100% right every time always without exception or ****up" is not a metric the military (or any other organization on the planet) uses. Nor should it be. If that were the standard by which the military implemented something or not, there would be no rifle, body armor, or vehicle fit for service. No new tactics or technology would ever be approved, and we'd fight with stone-age tools.
Driving to work is not 100% safe. People die on the roads every day. And when it happens, it completely sucks. But no one would say "Hey, let's get rid of all the cars on the planet" because of that.
Perhaps I'm just not as cynical about the quality of M4C members. I think in all but the rare exception, those talking about pink Aimpoints and similar are joking. And that is sort of my point...people who can't distinguish the difference between a joke and putting someone in the hospital are going to force the military to fall all over itself in an effort to maintain it's PCness. It's already been mentioned; more time spent in PowerPoint hell for meaningless bullshit than actually preparing to do their job. For the record, I never said DADT should or shouldn't be repealed.
Save your fantasy world stuff for another day, you are largely addressing an argument (people will get railroaded so gays should be barred forever) that I didn't really make.
Complication
12-22-10, 19:34
If Clinton implemented the much hated (by the left) DADT, and Obama has it repealed, does that make Clinton a bigot?
No. Before DADT, as I understand it, the military straight-up asked if you were gay. DADT was a compromise measure which allowed gays to serve as long as no one found out they were gay and they could serve because no one asked them their sexual orientation.
Clinton's DADT was a compromise which was an incremental change. It has been much lambasted not because it was a bigoted move where Clinton stripped gays of their rights (as it actually expanded them) but because it requires service members to effectively lie about who they are and results in mission-critical, highly effective men and women being discharged when their country needed them most. It was unpopular because it didn't do enough.
Complication
12-22-10, 19:37
Save your fantasy world stuff for another day, you are largely addressing an argument (people will get railroaded so gays should be barred forever) that I didn't really make.
No, you didn't make it. But it seems to be one of the lightning rods for criticism. Not sure what's so fantastic about anything I said.
GermanSynergy
12-22-10, 19:41
I've served with several gays when I was in the Army. It was never an issue, and two of them are very good friends to this day.
I'm going to approach a wait and see view on this to see how it pans out.
variablebinary
12-23-10, 03:46
DI: You disgust me you twinkly toed little shit. You throw that frag like a god damned girl.
Recruit: Harassment!!!!
DI: You little shit, man the hell up and drive on!
Recruit: If you are mean to me, I will sue the Army, get you discharged, get a book deal, and be on Oprah. Now fetch me a robe and a Mac with wifi, because I haven't blogged this week...
****ing Outstanding...this is exactly what we need...
Army Chief
12-23-10, 07:44
I'm looking forward to snappier uniforms and peppier music in future parades. :rolleyes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfGTm_viXPs
OK, now that was hilarious.
AC
platoonDaddy
12-23-10, 14:46
New D&C
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25Qhbdijv5Y&feature=related
A 11-B queen stands up out of a foxhole, yells at the enemy: "DON'T MAKE ME PUT MY HAND ON MY HIP!".
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.