Can you shoot? Can you move? Can you communicate?
Then who the fuck cares who you prefer to be involved with!? Especially when a lot of soldiers/officers seem to like to be with other people’s wives/husbands!
I would argue that half the army recruits can only do two out of the three of those, and half them only one at a time.
This is the same reason why women should be allowed the same combat positions as men. They still aren’t and it’s stupid.
If I remember correctly, the US started rolling back restrictions in 2013. Progress has definitely been slow, and we aren’t where we should be yet, but things are moving in the right direction.
We still have a ways to go with psychologist research, to be fair. My dad served two tours between 2003-2006 and only more recently came to understand PTSD isn’t something you just “get over.”
Same for sexism. It’s not easy for service members to get over that engrained idea of protecting women at the cost of the team. There’s a lot of promising research in resilience studies preparing military members prior to entering combat that I think could apply. As long as researchers and artists involved in VR type training are careful to include particular elements like more femme voices and such, it can be overcome before it’s an issue in active combat
And to be clear, I’m not familiar with the research veterans have cited to me that it is an issue to begin with. I’ve only really looked at PTSD and the use of VR for exposure therapy and CBT. I’m inclined to believe it would be an issue for at least some men. I’d like to look at Israel as a case study example when I get some time since they’ve had compulsory service for men and women for a while now
Name one combat position women aren’t allowed in (US).
Navy SEAL when I was in. That may have changed since then, I’ve been out for well over a decade.
“Well over a decade” ago is very different than today.
In 2013, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removed the military’s ban on women serving in combat, overturning the 1994 rule. Panetta’s decision gave the military services until January 2016 to seek special exceptions if they believed any positions must remain closed to women. The services had until May 2013 to draw up a plan for opening all units to women and until the end of 2015 to actually implement it.
In December 2015, Defense Secretary Ash Carter stated that starting in 2016 all combat jobs would open to women.
You’re giving squids a bad name. Surely you understood the question refers to present, not the past, right?
“Since DADT repeal [in 2010], many veterans who sought to upgrade their less than honorable discharges reported a prolonged and burdensome process, often requiring the use of a lawyer, to seek the respect and benefits they rightfully earned,” the letter stated. “And far too many veterans discharged under DADT had no idea they could seek an upgrade or where to start the process.”
Austin said today that 96% of the service members who were separated under DADT now have an honorable discharge.
“We will continue to strive to do right by every American patriot who has honorably served their country,” he said.
Glad the Biden Admin proactively upgraded their discharge statuses so no more veterans have to fight to change theirs
Glad the Biden Admin proactively upgraded their discharge statuses so no more veterans have to fight to change theirs
Nooo! Shut up! We have to focus on the horrible genocide in Gaza, while steering hard away from the horrible genocide in Ukraine!!!
–all of .ml
Are you saying this outweighs supporting a genocide?
Like oh he might have killed someone but he did pay his parking tickets. There is no comparison here.
They also don’t want you to talk about the genocide those now honorably discharged veterans are facing in event of a Trump victory.
Drag hopes they also want to do right by the unpatriotic veterans who honorably served their country and in the process got disillusioned and radicalised.
Congratulations to all of you!
I’m loving how there are people responding to this that I’ve blocked (their comments won’t load). I can only imagine what they’re complaining about.
In this case, the response you had blocked is worth seeing just because it was weird as fuck:
Not sure, who you are congratulating and what does love have to do with army related things?
Oh man. That’s sad. It doesn’t even make any sense.
“What does congratulating service members have to do with the army things?”.
Uhhh
Not sure, who you are congratulating and what does love have to do with army related things?
Damn, that’s the shortest memory I’ve ever seen. I’d give you a medal or something, but you might forget what it is and try to eat it.
I’ll give you a hint about who I’m congratulating then:
800 service members kicked out under [Don’t Ask Don’t Tell] just got discharges upgraded to honorable
As for what that has to do with love, I’m sorry that you don’t understand what they told that they weren’t supposed to tell.
Maybe you need to look up what Don’t Ask Don’t Tell was?
You can read about the context of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell on Wikipedia.
Or the article itself also explains why the other commentator wrote that ;)
This should’ve been done sooner.
All justice should be swifter. I’m still glad some people got acknowledged.
Well put
They worked hard! They deserve to be appreciated!
What did they work hard on?
Conceptually I think this is great.
But… How many folk are now eligible to be recalled to active duty?
Probably zero since this all happened decades ago at this point.
If anyone becomes eligible for recall due to this discharge upgrade, it’d be a very small number and even then, there’s next to no chance that they’d actually get called up. Can’t rule it out entirely because something about a Sith and absolutes (and because I don’t care to dig into the statistics) but realistically, it won’t happen.
10 U.S.C. § 688 (Retired members: authority to order to active duty; duties)
…a member described in subsection (b) may be ordered to active duty by the Secretary of the military department concerned at any time.
(b) Covered Members.-Except as provided in subsection (d), subsection (a) applies to the following members of the armed forces:
(1) A retired member of the Regular Army, Regular Navy, Regular Air Force, or Regular Marine Corps.
(2) A member of the Retired Reserve who was retired under section 1293, 7311, 7314, 8323, 9311, or 9314 of this title.
(3) A member of the Fleet Reserve or Fleet Marine Corps Reserve.
(4) A retired member of the Space Force.
This section states that retirees of armed forces branches and reservists may be recalled to active duty. The thing about subsection (d) refers to a program where officers could choose to retire early so doesn’t really come into play for what we’re talking about. It’s worth noting that a service member who completes their contract is not necessarily a retiree which is why the recall authority doesn’t apply more broadly.
Yeah I’m not aware of any mechanism to recall any former enlisted servicemember past their IRR period.
I figure if things get bad enough that they’d want any of us fat, broken old(ish)-timers back, we’ll see some new laws on the books making it possible.
DADT ended in 2011. The military would have to be pretty desperate to want most of those veterans back in service.
Bruh, if I got out and fulfilled my IRR honorably and whatnot, and then I was recalled years later, I would promptly smoke all the pot in reasonable distance from me the moment I received that recall notice.
I’m sure the existing draft covers it, but we’d be a long way down the list.
That’s not how it works. To be recalled you have to still be in the irr. To be in the irr you have to re-enlist. You can’t re-enlist if you’re discharged for dadt. If they still qualify for irr they could of course sign a new contract but that’d be entirely their decision.
