Posted on 8/4/2017, 10:30:42 PM by pboyington
In a letter to the Palm Center issued today, 56 retired generals and admirals released the following statement as a PC, trendy rebuttal to the President’s recent transgender ban in the armed forces.
“The Commander in Chief has tweeted a total ban of honorably serving transgender troops. This proposed ban, if implemented, would cause significant disruptions, deprive the military of mission-critical talent, and compromise the integrity of transgender troops who would be forced to live a lie, as well as non-transgender peers who would be forced to choose between reporting their comrades or disobeying policy. As a result, the proposed ban would degrade readiness even more than the failed ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy. Patriotic transgender Americans who are serving— and who want to serve—must not be dismissed, deprived of medically necessary health care, or forced to compromise their integrity or hide their identity.”
How in the name of God, can the transgender ban cause disruptions? The disruptions actually result when the military is forced to cater to the mentally ill who are suffering from gender dysphoria. No matter how cool the media tries to make transgenderism, the facts remain the same, transgenders are a permanent threat to good order and discipline in the armed forces.
I seriously doubt that the guy who thinks he’s a woman and wants to prance around in his sister’s dress is what you would refer to as ‘mission-critical talent.’ Mission critical talent are people like the men in Delta Force, not Chris Beck, who thinks he’s a woman named Kristin and who now shops in the ladies department at Macy’s.
Newsflash Chief Beck, you’re still a man, no matter what you may believe. You served your country honorably, but now it’s time for the men in the white suits to escort you to your padded Hummer.
Here’s some inverse logic – ‘the proposed ban would degrade readiness.’ Really, how does banning transgenders degrade readiness? Transgenders have been banned from serving in the US military since the Massachusetts boys went live in 1775. I seem to recall that the US military has kicked ass and taken names in some minor skirmishes like Saratoga, Gettysburg, San Juan Hill, Belleau Wood, Midway, the Bulge, Iwo Jima, the Frozen Chosin’, Linebacker I and II, Grenada and Tal Afar without trangenders storming the gates of Chapultepec. We won those battles and campaigns without people like Chelsea Manning, for the simple reason that we don’t need people like Bradley/Chelsea in our military.
A transgender serving in a military unit puts a strain on the unit’s readiness, as the individual is going through some phase of physical “gender reassignment”, not to mention the myriad of mental problems these people possess. The suicide rate among transgender people at 41 percent, is more than 25 times the rate of the general population, which is 1.6 percent. And among transgender people ages 18-44, the suicide attempt rate was 45 percent.
How is including these people in the US military a combat multiplier?
The statement also claimed that ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ impeded readiness as well. How? Tell me how gay people silently serving in the military inhibited the conduct of any US military operation in our history?
The feather merchants claim that transgender people must not be deprived of ‘medically necessary health care.’ Hmm? How is gender reassignment surgery a medical necessity? Saving lives in combat is a medical necessity, not ensuring that Bob can get some Uncle Sam financed estrogen shots that will enable to him to grow boobs like Jenna Jameson.
What kind of alternate reality are these duds living in?
Fully supportive of the recent statement denouncing the ban was none other than former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Martin Dempsey, who was literally the captain of the Pentagon Titanic during both Obama administrations. Examples of the PC madness run amok during Dempsey’s reign of social engineering terror are many. Here are a few examples: soldiers in Afghanistan were required to take gay sensitivity classes, male ROTC cadets paraded around in red high heels, soldiers from the 1st Infantry Division, a unit that landed on D-Day, were required to wear pregnancy simulators while doing PT, the Bible was taught in online classes as a sexist document, three women were passed through Ranger School on false pretenses and more importantly, absurd rules of engagement continued to be in effect in Afghanistan, ROE’s that put American soldiers lives at risk every hour of every day.
Another total idiot against the transgender ban is none other than Lieutenant-General Claudia Kennedy, an ardent feminist, and the woman who once stated, “This isn’t your father’s army anymore.”
It sure isn’t. Those armies had men like Patton at the helm, not someone in exile from a Berkeley encounter group.
Before Kennedy departed the lean green machine and military intelligence branch, she accused a fellow general officer of sexual harassment.
She was and is a big proponent of the fantasy called women in the combat arms. Of course, she, herself, has never been within 1000 miles of any shot and shell.
The current perfumed princes in the Pentagon and these retired feather merchants, duds and Grade A REMF’s, have taken the values of the civilian world and transferred them to the military. Nothing could be more dangerous.
Anyone who has crossed the line of departure in a real world combat environment will tell you that the only thing that counts is killing bad guys and breaking a lot of stuff. There is no time for homosexual affairs, transgender mental timeouts and women who can’t pick up a case of .50 cal ammo.
While most Americans just don’t care what people do with their own lives, the military is different and that’s what the 56 assorted feather merchants haven’t figured out yet and probably never will.
As General MacArthur stated, “Yours is the profession of arms, the will to win, the sure knowledge that in war there is no substitute for victory, that if you lose, the Nation will be destroyed, that the very obsession of your public service must be Duty, Honor, Country.”
The military bans people from serving for all sorts of reasons, from innocuous ailments like allergies to bee stings to people with bad hearing and poor vision. Why does the military do this, to ensure it has the most mentally and physically capable people in its ranks. Yet, there are retired and active duty senior leaders who believe everyone has a right to serve.
Nothing could be farther from the truth.
The worst mistake anyone can make right now is to assume that today’s recently retired or currently serving senior officers represent your conservative values. Most of them don’t. Most of them are liberal leaning swamp rats who have sucked down enough Kool Aid to fill the Potomac. The Pentagon is literally infested with liberals who believe that serving in the military is no different than working at some hipster startup, except that the military has cool uniforms and high explosives.
A perfect example is Admiral Paul Zukunft, head of the Coast Guard who said he would ignore the President’s directive and not ‘break faith’ with transgenders under his command.
It’s time for this insubordinate clown to be fired, dropped in rank and discharged.
Don’t make the mistake of believing that today’s senior leaders really care more about warfighting and the defense of this nation more than they do about fulfilling a cultural Marxist agenda.
There are very few conservatives left in the senior ranks as there are, very few, if any real warriors remaining.
Our retired and active senior military leaders’ failure to embrace reality is taking the focus off of warfighting, wasting everyone’s time and money and more importantly, endangering us all.