More on the American "Wikileaker"

Discussion in 'Int Corps' started by jumpinjarhead, Aug 9, 2010.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Apologies if this is not the right forum but I thought this might generate a bit more substantive comment here than on the current affairs or US fora. I find it interesting that it appears there may be a "Don't Ask Don't Think" problem in our intelligence community at work here as the danger signals about this fellow's reliability, if not basic emotional stability, were fairly obvious. In any event, it is clear to me that much of the praise he is receiving from the many anti-US, anti-war, anti-imperialism, pro-Islam etc. etc. crowd(s) is/are misplaced in that his motivations for doing what he did appear to be much less "high minded."
  2. In as much that whilst the US Forces will allow you to enlist as a Gay man, it won't allow you to talk about an entirely natural part of your life. In doing so, it automatically created a security risk, as he could not be open about it, which in turn opened him up to pressure (possibly only perceived pressure) from people who may not acknowledge very real security issues with what he was doing? If DADT didn't exist, and he could have been openly gay in his unit, then it is possible that he may not have fallen into a scene that is almost inimical to good security practices.

    Or is it that gay people with a liberal bent shouldn't be allowed in the US Armed Forces, because automatically they'll become a security risk?

    I would submit that DADT is structural way of ensuring security risk....

    As for his bullying, love of computers etc, I suspect that with better divisional/troop/chain of command care, he would have been an ideal candidate for your new Cyber Command!!
  3. Thanks for your opinion. As a Neanderthal, I would argue the opposite as to homosexuality (I also prefer that term to the one you chose).
  4. Not a problem, but DADT seems to be the worst of both worlds. I appreciate the cultural differences between the UK and US limit the desire or likelihood of openly Gay/Homosexual personnel serving in the US Armed Forces, but it does create some problems for you. The rest of the argument has been well rehearsed and I see very little point in replicating it in the Int Forum!
  5. He's been in for three short (or long, depending on how you look at it) years - how long is basic and trade for a US Army int specialist? - he's already got 2 reprimands. He has "assaulted an officer" (I assume it wasn't serious or he would have got more than a reprimand.) And yet he's still allowed to take his iPod (or variant music device) in to an int cell where he has sufficiently open or poorly supervised access to supposedly secure systems that he can repeatedly download MB of sensitive files on to it.

    Apart from the fact that it seems to (has been reported as) have made his life somewhat harder, I don't think his sexuality has much to do with this. I think he is just a c-o-c awareness, security & aftercare fail. Which chimes with JJH's opinion about his motivation - "blind rage against the machine" as opposed to "principled opposition to illegal war" (whether it was illegal or not is irrelevant - it is just that it is a commonly held belief.) I wonder if he'll experience the same sort of 'conversion to the cause' that afflicted LCpl Glenton? Especially as what Manning is alleged to have done has been far more destructive than depriving HMQ of one lance-jack driver for a couple of years?

    Regardless of whether you think homosexuals should or shouldn't be allowed to serve (and they always have done, if not openly) - DADT seems to be a singularly ineffective way of squaring the circle (yes, that was deliberate. I apologise.)

    (Irrelevant Glenton observation - does the road from Oz to Colchester pass anywhere near Damascus?)
  6. I agree-yet one of the many issues that apparently may not even get a fair hearing as our current masters in the White House and in Congress appear to be trying to push through an elimination of the DADT policy in spite of commitments made to wait until a legitimate study is done among the forces to see what they think. Someone more cynical than I might wonder if the upcoming by-elections in November has anything to do with such tactics. ;-)
  7. It's interesting to view a "Red State" opinion of the current mechinations vis-a-vis Nov instead of the more usual "Blue State" stuff I read. Again, as ever, the "truth" probably lies somewhere in between the two poles....
  8. 10 weeks' basic training and approximately 4 months for basic intelligence specialist.
  9. the added reality is that is is clear in other contexts that "legitimiz(s)ing" homosexuality is just the tip of the iceberg. For example at my large public uni, one now needs a veritable dictionary to keep up with the various (and apparently endless) iterations (some close minded bigots may even say perversions but of course that is to mix in--gasp/hiss/boo--morality or even worse religion) regarding sexual practice, orientation and "expression." Yet another reason to approach this in an objective fashion and actually consider the ramifications from the standpoint of the effect on the morale and effectiveness of forces and other inevitable issues of homosexuals demanding the right to live in married military quarters, have military funding of sex change ops and artificial insemination for homosexual "parents" etc. etc. Human nature and experience here in the US shows quite clearly that what begins with a relatively "simple" issue spins further and further toward the extreme.
  10. JJ I think you will find that is a fair description of current practice in HM Forces and causes no more issue than single mothers. Once we the hetrosexual majority lose our fixation with other peoples sexual habits all we need to do is get the rest to get over their fixations.
  11. Perhaps. *As I continue to point out however our societies and cultures share some similarities but many differences. *I mean one only need look at the appalling laxity of British standards for proper military haircuts to see my point.*


  12. So which is worse, a gayer with a shave-side coconut-bonce job, or a straight with a parting?
  13. Now I an of course a redneck etc, but I know a false premise when I see one.

    Besides, my momma(mum) taught me that 2 wrongs never make a right!

  14. I was once ordered to stay on-board until my USMC short back and sides had grown into a more "Naval Officer"-like tonsorial style. All I missed was Kuwait in Aug, not a huge loss.....
  15. You're just in denial JJH, I've seen American beauty!!