Trump II

[Alan Klein]

So the New York Times in their continuing anti-Trump effort now uses a trans-gender soldier, Chelsea Manning,  dishonorably discharged from the service for treason and who served 7 years in a brig to speak to why the service should allow trans-gender people into the service.  Beside the insult of letting a traitor speak to this, she (he) only highlights the point that maybe trans-gender people are unstable enough mentally that they shouldn't be allowed in the military or any part of the government where security is involved. The NY Times so hates Trump, that they are apparently blind to their stupidity in using her to support trans-gender rights regarding the military. What buffoons.   They actually make Trump seem reasonable in his position.   

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/27/opinion/trump-transgender-military-chelsea-manning.html?_r=0

[pegelli]

I can't believe, Pieter,  that you agreed with my logic.  I've circled the date in my calendar and will treasure the moment.

Regarding people who've had the surgery, my guess is that the military would reject enlistment anyway.  They aren't going to accept anyone who had major surgery who might have subsequent medical issues because of it.     The fact is the military, in peace-time anyway, can select the cream of the crop in mental and physical shape volunteers.  They have enough challenges fulfilling their mission of protecting the country to select those who might become an issue.    As citizens, we want them to do their best to protect us and to make sure they don't have side issues that could inflict harm on some soldiers because their comrades are not up to the task.  We owe other members of the service to do what we can to assure their survival.

Yup, I also made a note, it came totally unexpected 

So if having had major surgery makes you "unfit" for enlistment so be it. But then the criterion is "major surgery" and not because you're transgender.

But this subtle distinction is probably lost by Trump when he made his tweet

[LesPalenik]

It's not about the money.  But even if the person doesn't want sex change operation, how do you deal with some guy or gal or wants to act and be like the opposite sex in combat or not?.  How do you maintain orderly conditions?  How do you deal with such distractions when your mind should be on protecting your ass from getting shot and you have to depend on your comrade for your life?  These distractions will kill soldiers and maybe lose battles and wars.  Don't the soldiers who are there and their families deserve the kind of organization where the focus is on military operations and keeping your rifle clean and not trying to figure out toilet arrangements in the field.  The generals and the platoon sergeants have more important things to do.   Leave that other stuff to civilian situations.  Soldiering is a life and death situation.

About 80 percent of the jobs in the military are non-combat occupations.

http://www.military.com/join-armed-forces/military-myths.html

[Robert Roaldi]

There seems to be a formula. Every few days or every week or so, they make mention of some antiquated prejudice, some shiboleth of the "lefties" or "urban elites", so that red-blooded former middle-class deplorable white guys can vent and make jokes, while the powers-that-be, public and private, shove them a little further under various buses. As if a few transgendered people affects the country in any way. As if there haven't always been gays in the military. As if the USA isn't one of the largest importer of illegal drugs and one of the world's largest producers of porn. Yeah, make your country great again, why don't you. I can't believe people fall for this third-rate con from a pussy-grabbing fake-religion-toting windbag.

I see that Arizona (I think) wants to enact some rule that women cannot have an abortion with the permission of the impregnating male (and the report I read said that the sex need not even have to have been consensual, but I don't know if that's true). Good going, make females chattel again. Next month, get rid of that evil minimum wage too. With some luck, you'll be able to hire people for food. Or buy slaves again. (That's hyperbole, calm down.)

How's that swamp-clearing going, guys? How's the wall building? Anybody know who Trump owes money to yet?

It's stomach-churning.

[Richowens]

They're teenagers.  Didn't you curse when you were one?

No I didn't curse nor swear. I was raised in a very religious family. Public profanity or even swearing was not acceptable. 

 No wonder your parents didn't allow you to join. You would have been an embarrassment to them. There's nothing worse than a 14 year old with the mouth of a sailor.

[Alan Klein]

About 80 percent of the jobs in the military are non-combat occupations.

http://www.military.com/join-armed-forces/military-myths.html

But you never know if the trans-gender will want surgery.  Then what? 

In any case, even if you're in a non-combat position right now, what about tomorrow?  Suppose they have to transfer you to a position that requires you to be in a supporting role at a forward base?  Do commanders then have to check to see if who they're sending are trans-gendered?  They have more important things to worry about. 

The 80% they are referring to doesn't mean you will not wind up in combat.  It just means that your primary work classification is not tank driver or SEAL.  If you're a radio operator or repairman, they can transfer you to a forward base of operations which is combat.  You could wind up supporting a platoon out on reconnaissance operating the radio.   I was an electronic technician in the USAF repairing crypto equipment in an air force station far from combat in Japan.  Then, I wound up on a temporary assignment in a communication's van operating on the beach of an island.  Fortunately it wasn't in combat but in Hawaii.    But it could have just as well been in combat.  Everyone in the military learns to shoot even if your main job is to type.  You never know.

[Alan Klein]

No I didn't curse nor swear. I was raised in a very religious family. Public profanity or even swearing was not acceptable. 

 No wonder your parents didn't allow you to join. You would have been an embarrassment to them. There's nothing worse than a 14 year old with the mouth of a sailor.

Yeah, that was me.  A mouth of a sailor.  When I joined the USAF, I found out that load of airmen had mouths of sailors too.  We were all in the wrong service, I guess.  Did you go into the Boy Scouts?    You sound like you were qualified. 

[Peter McLennan]

I didn't see the BSA speech or read about it.  I was busy justifying other things he's doing.

Here ya go.  The whole speech.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwoTegi72WI

[LesPalenik]

But you never know if the trans-gender will want surgery.  Then what? 

In any case, even if you're in a non-combat position right now, what about tomorrow?  Suppose they have to transfer you to a position that requires you to be in a supporting role at a forward base?  Do commanders then have to check to see if who they're sending are trans-gendered?  They have more important things to worry about. 

The 80% they are referring to doesn't mean you will not wind up in combat.  It just means that your primary work classification is not tank driver or SEAL.  If you're a radio operator or repairman, they can transfer you to a forward base of operations which is combat.  You could wind up supporting a platoon out on reconnaissance operating the radio.   I was an electronic technician in the USAF repairing crypto equipment in an air force station far from combat in Japan.  Then, I wound up on a temporary assignment in a communication's van operating on the beach of an island.  Fortunately it wasn't in combat but in Hawaii.    But it could have just as well been in combat.  Everyone in the military learns to shoot even if your main job is to type.  You never know.

Usage of drugs and opioid painkillers is rampant in US Army. Those users are a much bigger problem than the few gays and transgenders.

Prescriptions for painkillers also had increased for active-duty soldiers at Fort Bragg. In 2012, more than 18,000 soldiers -- about a third of the installation's active-duty population -- received a total of 46,870 opiate painkiller prescriptions through Womack. The same trend was happening throughout the federal VA system.
According to the Department of Veterans Affairs, VA patients getting opioid prescriptions increased by nearly 77 percent between 2004 and 2012.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/01/18/rising-use-opioid-painkillers-and-efforts-curb-them-may-lead.html

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

A friend of mine wrote this (emphasis mine):

Gender dysphoria is a mental disorder and is in the DSM V. Transgender people have very high rates of suicide, depression, etc. I also don't think taxpayers should pay for transition surgery. The US Army was telling female troops that they had to be ok with men showering and bunking with them - not ok. If a person has gender reassignment surgery before the joining the military, has been in their new gender for awhile, and can perform their duties, and has a psych eval, fine. The role of the military is the defense of the nation, period. It is not a social experiment. We're also talking about a really tiny number of people.

Tend to agree with all of it.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

A new low, lame poof jokes.

OMG, how could you!? Using a homophobic slur in this civilized discussion, that is?

[Alan Klein]

Usage of drugs and opioid painkillers is rampant in US Army. Those users are a much bigger problem than the few gays and transgenders.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/01/18/rising-use-opioid-painkillers-and-efforts-curb-them-may-lead.html

Commanders do have major problems with troops who are alcoholics or addicted to drugs.  Why do you want to complicate commander's problems with sexual identity issues and where everyone is going to crap and which shower to use?  Aren't they busy enough?  I applaud a trans-gender person for wanting to serve his or her country.  But let's be sensible about it.  Let them serve in a civilian capacity.  After all, people with flat feet who want to serve are denied enlistment too.  Let the military focus on killing people and destroying things. 

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

...

[LesPalenik]

Commanders do have major problems with troops who are alcoholics or addicted to drugs.  Why do you want to complicate commander's problems with sexual identity issues and where everyone is going to crap and which shower to use?  Aren't they busy enough?  I applaud a trans-gender person for wanting to serve his or her country.  But let's be sensible about it.  Let them serve in a civilian capacity.  After all, people with flat feet who want to serve are denied enlistment too.  Let the military focus on killing people and destroying things.

I don't want to complicate commander's problems.
He may already know that a drunken or stoned straight soldier can't shoot straight whereas a person with sexual identity problems can be a much more accurate marksman.
No big deal to me either way, but there are much more serious and urgent problems which should be addressed first before tackling the shower problems.

[Peter McLennan]

Kristin Beck, transgender Navy SEAL hero: 'Let's meet face to face and you tell me I'm not worthy'

http://www.businessinsider.com/kristin-beck-trump-transgender-ban-2017-7

Now there's a meeting I'd like to see.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

EU must retaliate if hurt by U.S. sanctions on Russia: German business group
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-germany-zypries-idUSKBN1AC0MV

QUOTE  July 27, 2017 / 8:26 AM  " EU must retaliate if hurt by U.S. sanctions on Russia: German business group

3 Min Read

BERLIN (Reuters) - Europe must be prepared to respond in kind if the United States' proposed new sanctions against Russia end up hurting its companies, an influential German industry association said on Thursday.

U.S. lawmakers reached an agreement on Wednesday paving the way for the U.S. Senate to pass a bill as early as this week to impose the new sanctions on Russia and bar President Donald Trump from easing them without Congress' approval.

The European Union fears the new U.S. restrictions could be an obstacle to its companies doing business with Russia and threaten the bloc's energy supply lines, but the 28-country bloc is divided over how to respond.

The head of the German Committee on East European Economic Relations said potential damage to European energy sector companies with business interests in Russia could justify counter-sanctions.

"It's the last thing we want, but we must keep the option open," Michael Harms told a news conference in Berlin.

"The sanctions they want against pipeline projects seem designed to boost U.S. energy exports to Europe, create U.S. jobs and strengthen U.S. foreign policy." 

[...]

"Imposing sanctions that hit a third party, namely Europe, and at the same time promoting the American economy with the slogan 'buy American gas' - that's pretty striking," said Kurt Bock, chief executive of Germans chemicals giant BASF, which drills for gas in Russia.

[...]

German economy minister Brigitte Zyries complained on Thursday that Washington had abandoned the "common line" it has maintained with Europe over Russia."


The USA has become a liability to its former "friends". It's not a question of whether the European Community will respond, but how...

Cheers,
Bart

[scyth]

Kristin Beck, transgender Navy SEAL hero: 'Let's meet face to face and you tell me I'm not worthy'

http://www.businessinsider.com/kristin-beck-trump-transgender-ban-2017-7

Now there's a meeting I'd like to see.

Did it sever while it was he or when it already was a post op she ?

[Alan Klein]

EU must retaliate if hurt by U.S. sanctions on Russia: German business group
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-germany-zypries-idUSKBN1AC0MV

QUOTE  July 27, 2017 / 8:26 AM  " EU must retaliate if hurt by U.S. sanctions on Russia: German business group

3 Min Read

BERLIN (Reuters) - Europe must be prepared to respond in kind if the United States' proposed new sanctions against Russia end up hurting its companies, an influential German industry association said on Thursday.

U.S. lawmakers reached an agreement on Wednesday paving the way for the U.S. Senate to pass a bill as early as this week to impose the new sanctions on Russia and bar President Donald Trump from easing them without Congress' approval.

The European Union fears the new U.S. restrictions could be an obstacle to its companies doing business with Russia and threaten the bloc's energy supply lines, but the 28-country bloc is divided over how to respond.

The head of the German Committee on East European Economic Relations said potential damage to European energy sector companies with business interests in Russia could justify counter-sanctions.

"It's the last thing we want, but we must keep the option open," Michael Harms told a news conference in Berlin.

"The sanctions they want against pipeline projects seem designed to boost U.S. energy exports to Europe, create U.S. jobs and strengthen U.S. foreign policy." 

[...]

"Imposing sanctions that hit a third party, namely Europe, and at the same time promoting the American economy with the slogan 'buy American gas' - that's pretty striking," said Kurt Bock, chief executive of Germans chemicals giant BASF, which drills for gas in Russia.

[...]

German economy minister Brigitte Zyries complained on Thursday that Washington had abandoned the "common line" it has maintained with Europe over Russia."


The USA has become a liability to its former "friends". It's not a question of whether the European Community will respond, but how...

Cheers,
Bart

Bart:  You might be supporting Trump pretty soon who appears "weak" on Russian sanctions.  Pretty soon, all the EU leaders will be calling Trump "astute", a "fair trader unlike Congress" and "the only sensible politician in America."   They'll all want to be photographed shaking his hand, including Merkel. 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Bart:  You might be supporting Trump pretty soon who appears "weak" on Russian sanctions.

No need to become insulting. I have not lost my faculties, and I do not intend to drop to Trump's (or his supporter's) level of incoherence.

Maybe I need to remind you of the vision from the more influential economies of our world?

U.S. no longer a 'friend' in Merkel election program
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-germany-election-merkel-usa-idUSKBN19O1NS

QUOTE  July 3, 2017 / 4:29 PM  "BERLIN (Reuters) - In their campaign program for the German election, Chancellor Angela Merkel's conservatives have dropped the term "friend" in describing the relationship with the United States.

Four years ago, the joint program of her Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and its Bavarian sister party, the Christian Social Union (CSU), referred to the United States as Germany's "most important friend" outside of Europe.

The 2013 program also described the "friendship" with Washington as a "cornerstone" of Germany's international relations and talked about strengthening transatlantic economic ties through the removal of trade barriers.

But the words "friend" and "friendship" are missing from the latest election program - entitled "For a Germany in which we live well and happily" - which Merkel and CSU leader Horst Seehofer presented on Monday ahead of a Sept. 24 election.

Instead, the United States is described as Germany's "most important partner" outside of Europe. CDU officials were not immediately available to comment on the change in wording.

The change in wording underscores how relations between Berlin and Washington have deteriorated since U.S. President Donald Trump entered the White House in January."


The USA has become a second rate ally, a "partner" or now even less, a potential threat ...

Cheers,
Bart

[Peter McLennan]

Did it sever while it was he or when it already was a post op she ?

That's an unintelligible (and probably irrelevant) question.