Friday, July 20, 2012

Gay Pride at the Expense of Military Pride

The beginning of the End

            In a few days another Gay Pride parade will take place on the streets of San Diego. What makes this one noteworthy is the prominent presence of active duty military members gleefully celebrating their lifestyle with other members of their community. What matters not is how Americans see this. What matters most is how our enemies will view it.

I fear we have given a gift to Hamas and Al Qaeda recruiters that they could not have dreamed of. America is already seen as weak and decadent, this will convince foreign fighters that the formidable American military – arguably the most powerful fighting force in history – is decaying from the inside. In this case, they might be right.

Taps for the Death of Military Tradition

The Army I knew is gone. The Army that gave my parents a way out of poverty in the cotton fields of Mississippi and Tennessee is no more. The Army which gave me a tour of the world, which let me see other cultures and learn other languages, is gone. I opened my social network pages yesterday and my heart broke.

Change has come quickly to the military in recent years. Changes not designed to enhance the war fighting capabilities; no that’s too expensive. These changes are meant to remake the entire military culture. Rather than have an Army that is ready to protect and defend the people of America, it has been made over to reflect the cultural vision that politicians want to impose on the American people.

The Roots of Change

Some changes are good. Desegregation in the military was a good thing. But many of the changes now in progress have a dubious benefit for the country at large and seem to be headed in the direction of less liberty for all to the benefit of a few.

It is hard to pinpoint exactly when these changes occurred. One could argue that it began with President Truman signing executive order 9981 in April of 1949 but that was the end of a process that began years earlier during the manpower shortages of WWII.

Perhaps the original question of Blacks1 serving in the American military actually arose during the Civil War. In the earliest conflicts service from Black freemen and bondsmen was accepted without question. An estimated “5,000 Blacks” fought for American independence from England. The Civil War was the result of social questions about the humanity of Blacks living in American and the inhuman treatment they endured.

Several all-Black units served with distinction on both sides during that war. When that conflict ended many freed Blacks found a new live out on the far frontier with units such as the 9th and 10th (Horse) Cavalry Regiments. The Buffalo Soldiers left a legacy of bravery throughout the West and overseas when they served meritoriously in the Spanish American War.

Despite their record of achievement, White officers were reluctant to give them credit for their service and White society was equally reluctant to recognize those who had given so much for their freedom and independence. It took decades of work, patience and sacrifice before Blacks were able to force the issue to the Oval Office. Truman’s signature was the culmination of 85 years of toil. And it set in motion the social changes that eventually led to the Civil Rights Movement that finally granted full legal status to Black Americans.

Riding the Wave of Change

The role the military had in catalyzing change in America has not been lost on social engineers. From the early 70s throughout my own twenty year career and up into current times, those who would change America often test their techniques and tactics (with overt political support) on the people in America’s military. If you sit through yet another sexual harassment lecture know that those programs were developed a quarter century ago and refined painfully on captive audiences in uniform. I can tell you from personal experience that what they had in the beginning was crude, annoying and tedious—much like being forced to watch Soviet-era propaganda films – with no subtitles.

The main theme of the social engineering in the military has been to redefine what it is to be a man. The big pro-homosexual push in the uniformed services advocated by President Obama fits nicely into that agenda. Only men were targeted because the assumption was that everything wrong with society stemmed from inherently aggressive male tendencies. If that could be changed then society in general would benefit – and be more peaceful, I assume.

The fallacy of this was those same aggressive male tendencies are precisely what is needed when fighting a war. A unit must be aggressive to achieve its objectives in the face of determined enemy resistance. If you are facing dozens of enemy fighters who are dug in using civilians as shields, do you want to follow Alpha-males like Gunny Highway (played by Clint Eastwood in HEARTBREAK RIDGE) or do you want to follow Beta-males like Captain “Hawkeye” Pierce (played by Alan Alda in the television series M*A*S*H)?

Despite many sound arguments in favor of maintaining an aggressive edge over our enemies—arguments I made myself—the social engineers were determined to complete their pogrom. These liberated feminists and their Beta-male allies have forged ahead unabated. I assume they think that if Americans stop being to aggressively brave our enemies will do the same and world peace will reign.

Implied Weakness and Implications

Action in and around Afghanistan seems to prove that is not going to happen anytime soon. Any sign of weakness in our soldiers, sailors and airmen is seen as a motivating factor for our enemies in the Islamic world (also in foreign capitals like Beijing and Moscow; our true competition). Thus we have given a gift to the jihadists with our latest social experiment.

Repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell may have been the right thing to do. I do not have the historical perspective to judge that and I am not serving on active duty so I cannot gauge the effect of the executive order. Despite the heated debate, that was an internal issue. The overt actions of the Department of Defense as evidenced in this article changes things dramatically.

The Army is going against the established tenet of avoiding political posturing by making this change.  It is likely the other services have issued similar orders permitting active duty servicepersons to wear their uniforms publicly as part of Gay Pride parades. The article calls this an historic event. The Gay service people are ecstatic over being able to show their pride in their orientation and military service. “Defense Secretary Leon Panetta vowed in a video message to remove as many barriers as possible to making the military a model of equal opportunity …” and has committed to making the changes directed by President Barack Obama.

I am left with the question of how this will appear to our enemies. Islam expressly forbids homosexuality and the penalty is death by stoning, though most are merely publicly hanged. The national attention desired by Gay activists will happen. Media outlets from coast to coast will carry the San Diego parade live and in endless repeats for days while pundits debate the wisdom of the decision.

What concerns me is how it will play out on Al Jazeera.  As I said at the beginning, America is already seen as weak and decadent, this will convince foreign fighters that the formidable American military – arguably the most powerful fighting force in history – is decaying from the inside. Fighting American soldiers is tantamount to suicide, now, but if you believe that the will of Americans is waning, you start to believe you can win. That is a dangerous thing for our fighting forces on the ground.

Personally, my pride in the nation remains strong and I believe it will recover from the damage inflicted by these short-sighted, wrong-headed social engineers. However, for now, my pride in my service is diminished and tarnished by this shameful disrespect for those who came before. Perhaps in a few years it won’t matter, but today, it does, to me.

1. I choose not to use the politically correct term “African American” because it is historically inaccurate for most of our purposes. Without the luxury of full citizenship few Blacks could be considered “American” prior to 1967.

Note: in searching for relevant images for this blog I used the BING search engine. I input “Gays in the military” and set it for images. It returned about 70% Gay porn and images of naked young men mostly out of uniform. When I changed my filter to moderate to remove those image options, BING returned – nothing.

I got much more acceptable results when I switched to GOOGLE.