<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Assault on the Military</title>
	<atom:link href="http://catholicexchange.com/2009/10/14/122709/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://catholicexchange.com/2009/10/14/122709/</link>
	<description>Catholic News, Catholic Articles, Catholic Apologetics, Catholic Content, Catholic Information</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 03:46:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: jpckcmo</title>
		<link>http://catholicexchange.com/2009/10/14/122709/comment-page-1/#comment-43358</link>
		<dc:creator>jpckcmo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 04:53:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://catholicexchange.com/?p=122709#comment-43358</guid>
		<description>Exactly.  &quot;Don&#039;t ask, don&#039;t tell,&quot; was enacted in 1993.  Prior to that, being gay was not tolerated in any form in the military.  But they also have the tendency to ignore the policy in times of war.  The Reserve Component Unit Commander&#039;s Handbook gives the commanders great latitude in adhering to the policy when a conflict is ongoing.  Since WWII, there has been a pattern of looking the other way when we are involved in an ongoing war, then discharging gays in peacetime.  I think this runs contradictory to the idea that gays are a detriment to our defense efforts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Exactly.  &#8220;Don&#8217;t ask, don&#8217;t tell,&#8221; was enacted in 1993.  Prior to that, being gay was not tolerated in any form in the military.  But they also have the tendency to ignore the policy in times of war.  The Reserve Component Unit Commander&#8217;s Handbook gives the commanders great latitude in adhering to the policy when a conflict is ongoing.  Since WWII, there has been a pattern of looking the other way when we are involved in an ongoing war, then discharging gays in peacetime.  I think this runs contradictory to the idea that gays are a detriment to our defense efforts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: plowshare</title>
		<link>http://catholicexchange.com/2009/10/14/122709/comment-page-1/#comment-43324</link>
		<dc:creator>plowshare</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Oct 2009 03:44:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://catholicexchange.com/?p=122709#comment-43324</guid>
		<description>jpckmo, this is the first I have heard about the ban on gays being lifted during the Persian Gulf War.  Are you referring to the first Gulf war?  Could it be that the &quot;temporary lifting&quot; consisted of a &quot;Don&#039;t ask, don&#039;t tell&quot; policy?  Back then,you know, the usual policy was an uncompromising attitude of ferreting out gays. 

&quot;Don&#039;t ask, don&#039;t tell&quot; only became permanently adopted as a compromise between the ban and what Clinton wanted, wasn&#039;t it?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>jpckmo, this is the first I have heard about the ban on gays being lifted during the Persian Gulf War.  Are you referring to the first Gulf war?  Could it be that the &#8220;temporary lifting&#8221; consisted of a &#8220;Don&#8217;t ask, don&#8217;t tell&#8221; policy?  Back then,you know, the usual policy was an uncompromising attitude of ferreting out gays. </p>
<p>&#8220;Don&#8217;t ask, don&#8217;t tell&#8221; only became permanently adopted as a compromise between the ban and what Clinton wanted, wasn&#8217;t it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Captain Sadler</title>
		<link>http://catholicexchange.com/2009/10/14/122709/comment-page-1/#comment-43292</link>
		<dc:creator>Captain Sadler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 18:50:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://catholicexchange.com/?p=122709#comment-43292</guid>
		<description>If we are going to scrap nuclear missiles in accordance with Russia, let&#039;s have Russia go ahead and scrap theirs *first* this time. I bet they won&#039;t.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If we are going to scrap nuclear missiles in accordance with Russia, let&#8217;s have Russia go ahead and scrap theirs *first* this time. I bet they won&#8217;t.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jpckcmo</title>
		<link>http://catholicexchange.com/2009/10/14/122709/comment-page-1/#comment-43269</link>
		<dc:creator>jpckcmo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 00:21:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://catholicexchange.com/?p=122709#comment-43269</guid>
		<description>Although George Bush spoke directly with his field officers frequently, that is not the way it is traditionally done.  Traditionally, the President receives his information from field commanders via the Joint Chiefs or the Secretary of Defense, and for good reason.  The chain of command exists to provide proper perspective and to hear from both military and civilian defense leadership.  McCrystal&#039;s job is to follow the orders of the civilian government.  Maybe he&#039;s just naive.

The missile defense system cost $150 billion dollars to develop and never produced anything workable.  It was suppposed to defend us and Eastern Europe from a threat that doesn&#039;t even exist anymore (not even Iran). His plan to station missile interceptors on ships in the region is a better defense of Israel and the Gulf states than the missile system.

Even Henry Kissinger (fellow Peace Prize winner) says we need to reduce our stockpile of nuclear weapons in coordination with Russia, and went there after the election at Obama&#039;s request to lay the groundwork for such a deal.  Trust but verify, as Reagan advises.

Although opinions differ among retired and active generals and admirals regarding whether to keep &quot;Don&#039;t Ask, Don&#039;t Tell&quot; in place, the data does not back up keeping the ban on gays in the military.  The ban was temporarily lifted during the Persian Gulf War with no wave of resignations and no detriment to service or morale reported.  Britain has announced their lifting of the ban a &quot;solid achievement.&quot;  Israel has allowed openly gay soldiers for years with no harmful effects.  I don&#039;t think anyone would call the Israeli military ineffective.  Threats to leave the military if gays are allowed have been proven to be just talk.  And the loss of 13,000 talented individuals is harming our national security.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Although George Bush spoke directly with his field officers frequently, that is not the way it is traditionally done.  Traditionally, the President receives his information from field commanders via the Joint Chiefs or the Secretary of Defense, and for good reason.  The chain of command exists to provide proper perspective and to hear from both military and civilian defense leadership.  McCrystal&#8217;s job is to follow the orders of the civilian government.  Maybe he&#8217;s just naive.</p>
<p>The missile defense system cost $150 billion dollars to develop and never produced anything workable.  It was suppposed to defend us and Eastern Europe from a threat that doesn&#8217;t even exist anymore (not even Iran). His plan to station missile interceptors on ships in the region is a better defense of Israel and the Gulf states than the missile system.</p>
<p>Even Henry Kissinger (fellow Peace Prize winner) says we need to reduce our stockpile of nuclear weapons in coordination with Russia, and went there after the election at Obama&#8217;s request to lay the groundwork for such a deal.  Trust but verify, as Reagan advises.</p>
<p>Although opinions differ among retired and active generals and admirals regarding whether to keep &#8220;Don&#8217;t Ask, Don&#8217;t Tell&#8221; in place, the data does not back up keeping the ban on gays in the military.  The ban was temporarily lifted during the Persian Gulf War with no wave of resignations and no detriment to service or morale reported.  Britain has announced their lifting of the ban a &#8220;solid achievement.&#8221;  Israel has allowed openly gay soldiers for years with no harmful effects.  I don&#8217;t think anyone would call the Israeli military ineffective.  Threats to leave the military if gays are allowed have been proven to be just talk.  And the loss of 13,000 talented individuals is harming our national security.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

