The United States Army continues to humiliate itself by allowing almost anyone — from grandmothers to idiots — to enlist, so long as they’re not gay. Because gays are, somehow, bad for morale and some gobbledygook known as “unit cohesion.”
Did I mention criminals?
The number of waivers granted to Army recruits with criminal backgrounds has grown about 65 percent in the last three years, increasing to 8,129 in 2006 from 4,918 in 2003, Department of Defense records show.
…
It has also increased the number of so-called “moral waivers” to recruits with criminal pasts, even as the total number of recruits dropped slightly. The sharpest increase was in waivers for serious misdemeanors, which make up the bulk of all the Army’s moral waivers. These include aggravated assault, burglary, robbery and vehicular homicide.
Giving criminals “moral waivers” — I can just hear the recruiter saying, “Heckuva record, Brownie — welcome to the Army!”
An attorney is never supposed to publicly ask a question he doesn’t already know the answer to, but would the median soldier, especially the median combat troopmember in Iraq or Afghanistan, really experience greater morale — and feel more “cohesive” — with a convicted robber or burglar as his bunkmate than a spotless-record homosexual? If so, then the military has even bigger problems than the robbers and burglars.
More thoughts from UpWord.
6 responses so far ↓
Link Windypundit // Feb 14, 2007 at 1:27 pm
"I now believe that if gay men and lesbians served openly in the United States military, they would not undermine the efficacy of the armed forces. Our military has been stretched thin by our deployments in the Middle East, and we must welcome the service of any American who is willing and able to do the job."
That's no wacky liberal do-gooder, that's General John M. Shalikashvili, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in a NYT op ed.
Gays have been serving openly but unofficially in the military for a while now, especially under "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," and the data is in: Gay soldiers serve as honorably as straight soldiers, and their presence doesn't don't harm unit cohesion.
Link Dave // Feb 14, 2007 at 1:28 pm
I don't think unit cohesion is "gobbledygook" but I also don't think it is affected by the presence of gays or lesbians. That claim is a straw man (or woman).
Link johnmichael // Feb 14, 2007 at 2:45 pm
Happy Valentine's Day.
I must be out of it. I didn't realize that keeping gays out of the military was still such an issue. I for some reason thought it had been resolved.
Link EclectEcon // Feb 14, 2007 at 10:43 pm
They won't take us older people either.
Link Matt // Feb 15, 2007 at 2:51 am
That's not half as crazy as living in a country where importing the wrong variety of flower is a felony, but aggravated assault, robbery, burglary, and vehicular homicide are all misdemeanors.
Link Phil T. // Feb 20, 2007 at 2:38 am
Some behavioral scientists study a distinction between "social cohesion" and "task cohesion." Which should lead the military to ask, which is more important? That no one in the unit be exposed to someone they might not like, or that the unit gets the job done?