Gays ousted from military now hoping ...

Gays ousted from military now hoping to return

There are 513 comments on the The Boston Globe story from Dec 23, 2010, titled Gays ousted from military now hoping to return. In it, The Boston Globe reports that:

Joseph Rocha reported being cruelly hazed by Navy colleagues. Katherine Miller resigned from West Point halfway through, weary of concealing her sexual orientation.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Boston Globe.

First Prev
of 26
Next Last

“ OBAMA LIED ABOUT OBAMACARE”

Since: Mar 09

HE'S LYING ABOUT IRAN

#547 Jan 20, 2011
Americo Infidelity wrote:
<quoted text>
AND you're more than just a republican, you're a frigging *******!
This coming from the twice banned identity thief/copycat troll.

Oh the hypocrisy....

Since: Dec 08

San Francisco, CA

#548 Jan 20, 2011
American_Infidel wrote:
<quoted text>
This coming from the twice banned identity thief/copycat troll.
Oh the hypocrisy....
Who was twice banned?

PS: Care to offer a referral ... I'm looking for the name of a really good attorney - I have a contractor friend who is having a problem with one of his clients that he just did a huge job for ... and I recall you sort of flipping out a few weeks ago over attorneys, law suits, etc ...(although I don't recall the context of those posts because I wasn't really paying that close attention)

Thanks!

PS: You can just email it to me, and I'll pass the name along.

Since: Dec 08

San Francisco, CA

#549 Jan 20, 2011
American_Infidel wrote:
<quoted text>
This coming from the twice banned identity thief/copycat troll.
Oh the hypocrisy....
Hey - I can't wait to see the Boehnercare proposal, and I hear the Cantorcare proposal is going to be a real gas...

Since: Jan 09

Brookfield, VT

#550 Jan 20, 2011
TolkMax wrote:
<quoted text>
I hear what you're saying, but you need to dig a little deeper.
For instance. Obama never claimed to be against the war in Afghanistan - he claimed to be against the Invasion of Iraq.
Many (probably most) who are against the war in Iraq all supported our military action in Afghanistan, and in fact, are frustrated over the fact that Iraq has been a huge distraction which has clearly devastated our efforts in Afghanistan.
There is a speech where Obama said " within 16 months of taking office I will have all the combat troops out of the war and you can take that to the bank " In fairness he did not say which war but by saying all combat troops he gave the impression all meant all combat troops as the war on terror { as the American people are told]is world wide. Also was he not one of few who voted against the use of force?

Since: Dec 08

San Francisco, CA

#551 Jan 21, 2011
j w mcsherry wrote:
<quoted text> There is a speech where Obama said " within 16 months of taking office I will have all the combat troops out of the war and you can take that to the bank " In fairness he did not say which war but by saying all combat troops he gave the impression all meant all combat troops as the war on terror { as the American people are told]is world wide. Also was he not one of few who voted against the use of force?
This is where paying attention to detail is important:

Obama was asked about "IRAQ" and Obama said he'd bring the combat troops home, and he has!

Obama NEVER OPPOSED the Afghanistan invasion to unseat the Taliban.

Obama OPPOSED the invasion of Iraq. At the time, he stated one of many reasons to his opposition was it would be a huge DISTRACTION from our mission in Afghanistan. Additionally, he opposed the invasion of Iraq because Sadam had NOTHING to do with 9/11 - a fact Bush consistently ignored.

Obama kept his promise - he removed combat troops from Iraq, and he did it responsibly.(Furthermore - he waited, and took longer to do it, because he respected the advise of his generals.)

Obama kept his promise - he repealed DADT.

Obama kept his promise - he overhauled health care.

Obama kept his promise - he brought forward the equal pay legislation.

Obama kept his promise on hundreds of things.

I'm not sure what your point it, or why you have such a significant need to work "against" OUR president, but as a true Republican would say - you're either part of the solution, or you're part of the problem and you, my friend, don't appear to be on the side of the solution...

Since: Dec 08

San Francisco, CA

#552 Jan 21, 2011
American_Infidel wrote:
<quoted text>
This coming from the twice banned identity thief/copycat troll.
Oh the hypocrisy....
I like "The Cry Baby is in the House" much better!

You should consider changing your moniker - oh, but you can't copy Americo Infidelity, or you'll end up getting banned!
Frank Stanton

New York, NY

#553 Jan 21, 2011
TolkMax wrote:
<quoted text>
This is where paying attention to detail is important:
Obama was asked about "IRAQ" and Obama said he'd bring the combat troops home, and he has!
Obama NEVER OPPOSED the Afghanistan invasion to unseat the Taliban.
Obama OPPOSED the invasion of Iraq. At the time, he stated one of many reasons to his opposition was it would be a huge DISTRACTION from our mission in Afghanistan. Additionally, he opposed the invasion of Iraq because Sadam had NOTHING to do with 9/11 - a fact Bush consistently ignored.
Obama kept his promise - he removed combat troops from Iraq, and he did it responsibly.(Furthermore - he waited, and took longer to do it, because he respected the advise of his generals.)
Obama kept his promise - he repealed DADT.
Obama kept his promise - he overhauled health care.
Obama kept his promise - he brought forward the equal pay legislation.
Obama kept his promise on hundreds of things.
I'm not sure what your point it, or why you have such a significant need to work "against" OUR president, but as a true Republican would say - you're either part of the solution, or you're part of the problem and you, my friend, don't appear to be on the side of the solution...
YOU Lie !

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

#554 Jan 21, 2011
Frank Stanton wrote:
<quoted text>
YOU Lie !
What part of it is lies? Please elaborate.
Frank Stanton

New York, NY

#555 Jan 21, 2011
Curteese wrote:
<quoted text>What part of it is lies? Please elaborate.
1. I was quoting the famous congressman.

2. ALL troops are combat troops. The fact that some may be in supply, maintenance, K.P. etc., doesn't make them less cpable of fighting. Or should we replace them with Lucy the Lunchlady from my jr. high school ? Many of the trrops have seimply been redesignated to support adn training.

3. The U.S. is built a HUGE military base in Iraq to maintain a large militray presence there for decades to come.

To say he has brought home our combat troops from Iraq is simpley NOT TRUE.

I don't think he ever had any intention to do so. Sayin so was purely politics. And as much as I despise him, he has made the right decision to keep American military forces on Iraqi soil for decades to come.

Let me ask you this:

In 1914, World War One began. The U.S. entered World War I in 1917. Now 1917 plus 60 years equals 1977. Do you think that if President Wilson told Americans in 1917, that AMerican troops would be in Europe until at LEAST 1977, that Americans would have suppported that ?!

But the U.S. has had militray troops in Europe since 1942. Nearly 70 years later we STILL have militray forces scattered all over Europe. Are these troops EVER comeing home ?! The Soviet Union is dead Thank God, and a Soviet or Russian invasion of Europe at this point is considered unrealistic by everyone. So WHY are we still spending BILLIONS OF DOLLARS a year to maintain vast U.S. military forces in Germany, Japan, and elsewhere in the world, when the war ended 65 years ago ?!

WHEN are these troops coming home ?!

And WHY are the liberals, who were always screaming to broiing the troops home from Iraq, NOT screaming about bringing the troops home from Germany, Japan, and eslewhere in teh world, where they have been since World War II ?! WHY aren't they doing this ?! WHY are they still there 65 years or more later ?!

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

#556 Jan 21, 2011
Frank Stanton wrote:
<quoted text>
1. I was quoting the famous congressman.
2. ALL troops are combat troops. The fact that some may be in supply, maintenance, K.P. etc., doesn't make them less cpable of fighting. Or should we replace them with Lucy the Lunchlady from my jr. high school ? Many of the trrops have seimply been redesignated to support adn training.
3. The U.S. is built a HUGE military base in Iraq to maintain a large militray presence there for decades to come.
To say he has brought home our combat troops from Iraq is simpley NOT TRUE.
I don't think he ever had any intention to do so. Sayin so was purely politics. And as much as I despise him, he has made the right decision to keep American military forces on Iraqi soil for decades to come.
Let me ask you this:
In 1914, World War One began. The U.S. entered World War I in 1917. Now 1917 plus 60 years equals 1977. Do you think that if President Wilson told Americans in 1917, that AMerican troops would be in Europe until at LEAST 1977, that Americans would have suppported that ?!
But the U.S. has had militray troops in Europe since 1942. Nearly 70 years later we STILL have militray forces scattered all over Europe. Are these troops EVER comeing home ?! The Soviet Union is dead Thank God, and a Soviet or Russian invasion of Europe at this point is considered unrealistic by everyone. So WHY are we still spending BILLIONS OF DOLLARS a year to maintain vast U.S. military forces in Germany, Japan, and elsewhere in the world, when the war ended 65 years ago ?!
WHEN are these troops coming home ?!
And WHY are the liberals, who were always screaming to broiing the troops home from Iraq, NOT screaming about bringing the troops home from Germany, Japan, and eslewhere in teh world, where they have been since World War II ?! WHY aren't they doing this ?! WHY are they still there 65 years or more later ?!
It does my heart good to see that someone still is so idealistic and hippy dippy. How nice your candy colored world will be. Grow up. The world is full of anger and hate and misery. The European troops were there to stop the Soviets,sure. Many Americans bases HAVE been closed. If you think all of Europe clean and sober, think again. There is still turmoil in the Balkans and other regions.

As for the middle east. Do you believe there will EVER be peace in those tortured countries? It has been unstable since the bible and is not likely to calm down in any of our lifetimes.

I hate pouring good money after bad too, but if the American troops all came home tomorrow just WHAT do you think would happen? Please tell us how stable that world would be.

Since: Dec 08

San Francisco, CA

#557 Jan 21, 2011
Frank Stanton wrote:
<quoted text>
1. I was quoting the famous congressman.
2. ALL troops are combat troops. The fact that some may be in supply, maintenance, K.P. etc., doesn't make them less cpable of fighting. Or should we replace them with Lucy the Lunchlady from my jr. high school ? Many of the trrops have seimply been redesignated to support adn training.
3. The U.S. is built a HUGE military base in Iraq to maintain a large militray presence there for decades to come.
To say he has brought home our combat troops from Iraq is simpley NOT TRUE.
I don't think he ever had any intention to do so. Sayin so was purely politics. And as much as I despise him, he has made the right decision to keep American military forces on Iraqi soil for decades to come.
Let me ask you this:
In 1914, World War One began. The U.S. entered World War I in 1917. Now 1917 plus 60 years equals 1977. Do you think that if President Wilson told Americans in 1917, that AMerican troops would be in Europe until at LEAST 1977, that Americans would have suppported that ?!
But the U.S. has had militray troops in Europe since 1942. Nearly 70 years later we STILL have militray forces scattered all over Europe. Are these troops EVER comeing home ?! The Soviet Union is dead Thank God, and a Soviet or Russian invasion of Europe at this point is considered unrealistic by everyone. So WHY are we still spending BILLIONS OF DOLLARS a year to maintain vast U.S. military forces in Germany, Japan, and elsewhere in the world, when the war ended 65 years ago ?!
WHEN are these troops coming home ?!
And WHY are the liberals, who were always screaming to broiing the troops home from Iraq, NOT screaming about bringing the troops home from Germany, Japan, and eslewhere in teh world, where they have been since World War II ?! WHY aren't they doing this ?! WHY are they still there 65 years or more later ?!
Frank - you're getting very sloppy. There are countless errors in this post, and I'm not just talking about the 17 typos, and multiple spelling errors - I'm talking about the content, as well.

ALL TROOPS ARE NOT COMBAT TROOPS. Some are training, some are medical. Some are strategists, some are interpreters. The army doesn't take their interpreters, and put them on the front lines in heavy artillery combat.

The liberals aren't screaming to "close" all of our international bases, because liberals can see the value of having outposts throughout the world.

The real question is "why" can't you?

PS: Our troops haven't been in engaged in 70 years of "combat" in Europe, Africa and Asia.

Honestly - the level of your questioning is truly frightening, and truly exhibits your general lack of overall knowledge when it comes to politics and America's place in the world.

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

#558 Jan 21, 2011
TolkMax wrote:
<quoted text>
Frank - you're getting very sloppy. There are countless errors in this post, and I'm not just talking about the 17 typos, and multiple spelling errors - I'm talking about the content, as well.
ALL TROOPS ARE NOT COMBAT TROOPS. Some are training, some are medical. Some are strategists, some are interpreters. The army doesn't take their interpreters, and put them on the front lines in heavy artillery combat.
The liberals aren't screaming to "close" all of our international bases, because liberals can see the value of having outposts throughout the world.
The real question is "why" can't you?
PS: Our troops haven't been in engaged in 70 years of "combat" in Europe, Africa and Asia.
Honestly - the level of your questioning is truly frightening, and truly exhibits your general lack of overall knowledge when it comes to politics and America's place in the world.
It's Frank's bottomless hatred of Obama that fuels his ire. If Obama cured cancer, Frank would complain that he did not get into a time machine and cure it earlier. It's useless to try to reason with him.

Since: Jan 09

Bennington, VT

#560 Jan 22, 2011
TolkMax wrote:
<quoted text>
Frank - you're getting very sloppy. There are countless errors in this post, and I'm not just talking about the 17 typos, and multiple spelling errors - I'm talking about the content, as well.
ALL TROOPS ARE NOT COMBAT TROOPS. Some are training, some are medical. Some are strategists, some are interpreters. The army doesn't take their interpreters, and put them on the front lines in heavy artillery combat.
The liberals aren't screaming to "close" all of our international bases, because liberals can see the value of having outposts throughout the world.
The real question is "why" can't you?
PS: Our troops haven't been in engaged in 70 years of "combat" in Europe, Africa and Asia.
Honestly - the level of your questioning is truly frightening, and truly exhibits your general lack of overall knowledge when it comes to politics and America's place in the world.
"ALL TROOPS NOT COMBAT TROOPS" True but all troops are traind in the use of a personal weapon. I'am glad you mention Medical the last time I went to the rifle with the Air Force Reserve the Medical people were there to be qualified. Plus All of this is a case of how you use words. Eamples Special Forces are not combat troops they are advisors. Military Police are police. But the best is Kennedy did not sent combat troops into Vietnam he sent in a U S Marine infantry Regiment For security. 70 years for Aisa also true if don't count Korea or Vietnam. Again by use of words Korea was a Police action Korea was not a war.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 26
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Elmendorf Air Force Base Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Air Force to downsize staff at closed King Salm... (Feb '10) Jan '15 Jimmie Hancock 38
News A former Alaskan and gay rights advocate named ... (Jan '13) Jan '13 Poppin in for a tad 1
News Wreckage found on Alaska glacier is from 1952 (Jun '12) Jun '12 Jim dickson 1
News Air Force general to visit Eielson Air Force Base (Feb '12) Feb '12 Benjamin 1
News Radio operators ham it up on JBER (Dec '11) Dec '11 Bri 1
News After 26 years, Master Sgt. Junius Parham retir... (Apr '10) Sep '11 Gramps 3
Elmendorf Baseball Team 63-65 (Sep '11) Sep '11 Tom 1
More from around the web