Posted on Jun 4, 2017
Report: Military Could Cancel Obama’s Transgender Enrolment Initiative – MILO NEWS
3.61K
31
16
0
0
0
I don't know how credible this is.
Report: Military Could Cancel Obama’s Transgender Enrolment Initiative – MILO NEWS
Posted from milo.yiannopoulos.net
Transgender
LGBTQ+
Mental Health
Logistics
Barack Obama
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 9
5
5
0
I'd just look at this as a readiness and cost issue. If a Soldier is allowed this procedure he or she will be out of the net for a specified time period, probably years and non-deployable. And there is a very large cost in which outside medical providers must be utilized. The SM is getting a benefit out of their service but the unit gains no benefit from the Soldier. It may sound coarse but the military is not a place to conduct social experiments and un-necessary surgeries. I highly doubt that a civilian could join a company and then think on the company's dime and time that they would be allowed to re-create themselves w/o providing a benefit to the company.
(5)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
CW3 Lindsey Muller - I'd like to know where your data comes from on the total cost of the procedure and the time requirement This is a current topic at MEDCOM and the cost is well over 25K.
On your education point- the current policy will not afford a SM to utilize any educational benefits until they have served 36 months in the Army.
On your education point- the current policy will not afford a SM to utilize any educational benefits until they have served 36 months in the Army.
(2)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
CW3 Lindsey Muller - MEDCOM gets its data obviously from medical sources. I think an issue could be the type of personnel required for such an undertaking are not in the military and a private source must be procured. // I think the 3yr ADSO makes sense but for me I think the readiness of the military needs to be addressed force wide regardless of the medical issue. A private corporation could not operate, conduct business, turn a profit for share holders if they followed the Army's model. If you looked at the numbers of non deployable Soldiers I'd bet you could fill an entire Division out. In terms of cost/benefit that is a multi-million waster in productivity not to mention a cause/effect of repeated deployments for certain low density MOSs.
In the end, for me, its not about the medial issue. The topic should be military and personnel readiness. Thanks for the dialogue.
In the end, for me, its not about the medial issue. The topic should be military and personnel readiness. Thanks for the dialogue.
(2)
(0)
MSgt (Join to see)
LTC Martin, you are missing a key point: accepting transgender recruits is about excepting those who have ALREADY transitioned, therefore no surgical costs incurred. The original thought was 18 mos stable in "new" gender. That is plenty of time post-op to be fully recovered & in deployable shape.
(1)
(0)
3
3
0
I'm pretty sure that this Transgender Initiative is in regards to those that already made the transition so there will be no deployment issues. this individual will be part of a unit and we as leaders need to respect them for who they are. Its like "some people" have a problem with gays, I say why do you care what happens in peoples bedrooms ??? so same applies to Transgender, why do some care what's between their legs ??? Why is it that its almost 2018 and we are still dealing with these issues ?? CANT WE ALL JUST GET ALONG !!! I don't care if you're REPUBLICAN or DEMOCRAT, enough is enough. And same goes to RASICIM, we are white and African Americans and other ethnicities in this country and we ARE NOT GOING ANYWHERE !!
(3)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
I want to fill out an application where it simply asks "ethnic background? - USA, Canada, Asia, or similar".
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
Considering Milo is a member of the LGBT community without the sheepish dogma of postmodern liberalism, I'd say he's got a point. What BO did violated the US Constitution to begin with considering the CONGRESS has sole responsibility to regulate the armed services. Until there is an amendment modifying those sections of the US Constitution all members of the Armed Services who have taken an oath to defend that very document should be ashamed of themselves if they let emotion and unlegislated social politics dictate their fealty.
Article I. Section I.
All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.
Article I. Section VIII.
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
Article I. Section I.
All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.
Article I. Section VIII.
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google