Trump II

[Littlefield]

It is laughable the Pentagon really thought Trump was talking about attacking North Korea.

[Otto Phocus]

And this is the guy who has his finder on the nuclear trigger...how's that make you feel?

The good news is that he really doesn't.  He has his finger on the secure speed dial to the people who launch the missiles. 

[Robert Roaldi]

A new low, lame poof jokes.

[Alan Klein]

Nowadays, not too many soldiers fight in a combat theater anymore, so not every recruit needs to be a Rambo with a high sperm count. The most dangerous job in army is to drive a truck on foreign territory. More troops are killed by IDF and IEDS than with small arms fire. When it comes to enemy killing, skilled snipers and drone operators can be very effective regardless of their gender and physique.

The issue is that in the middle of doing his or her duties of being a soldier, the soldier decides to go through a medical procedure to transition himself to a different sex.  The military loses him as a causality at that point because he's not fit to serve.  Will he recover in fact to even serve at all?  Will he be able to handle the job they trained him at afterwards or will they lose him entirely and have to discharge him? 

The military wants healthy soldiers to serve and die.  Healthy and dying sounds ironic I suppose, but that's the way it is.  I served over 4 years in the USAF and was almost denied my enlistment when they checked me medically because they found a slight scoliosis (curvature) in my back. They can't be bogged down with people who have medical issues, whether mental or physical.  This is not the same as being gay where there aren't medical issues. 

[Alan Klein]

Well, this is what John McCain had to say about this...

McCain didn't approve letting in new recruits with this problem.   He said Trump should allow the review process already underway to be completed.  He did say that those already serving would be allowed to continue to serve.  Trump's tweet didn't address that.  I do agree that Trump should have allowed a formal release of military procedures from the Pentagon to avoid confusion.  I suppose they'll clarify it now. 

[Peter McLennan]

Hey, Alan, since you seem to have a bottomless pit of justifications for Trump's behaviour, what's your reaction to Trump's speech to the Boy Scouts of America?

[LesPalenik]

Hey, Alan, since you seem to have a bottomless pit of justifications for Trump's behaviour, what's your reaction to Trump's speech to the Boy Scouts of America?

Alan's reaction to that speech is not so important (I don't mean it in a negative way, Alan), but the really worrisome thing is that most of the Scouts seemed to eat it up.

[Otto Phocus]

Alan's reaction to that speech is not so important (I don't mean it in a negative way, Alan), but the really worrisome thing is that most of the Scouts seemed to eat it up.

I dunno, Scouts are pretty good at identifying BS.

They were applauding because that is the expected behavior when you have a VIP speaker. We do the same thing in the military.

[LesPalenik]

They were applauding quite enthusiastically.
But not as hard as they were clapping at George W. Bush's speech in 2005. But then Bush's speech was much better and classier.

https://bearingdrift.com/2017/07/25/2005-jamboree-president-george-w-bush-knew-address-boy-scouts/

[Alan Klein]

Hey, Alan, since you seem to have a bottomless pit of justifications for Trump's behaviour, what's your reaction to Trump's speech to the Boy Scouts of America?

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

[Schewe]

Well, it seems the Boy Scouts were really sorry they had Trump give a speech...

Boy Scouts chief apologizes for Trump’s Jamboree address

The head of Boy Scouts of America has apologized following President Trump’s controversial speech earlier this week at the organization's National Jamboree, saying he regrets politics were brought into the event.

"I want to extend my sincere apologies to those in our Scouting family who were offended by the political rhetoric that was inserted into the jamboree," Chief Scout Executive for the Boy Scouts of America Michael Surbaugh said in a statement on Thursday.

"That was never our intent. The invitation for the sitting U.S. President to visit the National Jamboree is a long-standing tradition ... It is in no way an endorsement of any person, party or policies.

"For years, people have called upon us to take a position on political issues, and we have steadfastly remained non-partisan and refused to comment on political matters. We sincerely regret that politics were inserted into the Scouting program."

Interesting that the president of BSA is the eco of ATT which is trying to merge with Time/Warner...

The president of the Boy Scouts needs the Trump administration to approve his mega-merger

But at least Randall Stephenson (prez of BSA and ATT CEO) had the balls to apologize even if it pissed off Trump.

We need more people to stand up to the incompetent behavior and demeanor of the #BigGoofyOrangeDummy...

[Alan Klein]

By the way, if I was in the Boy Scouts, I would have missed the Trump speech because my parents wouldn't let me join the Boy Scouts.  (How's that for a Trump malapropism?) It's true.  My parents were afraid of bears or alligators or something.  When they finally let me go to camp when I was 6 or 7, it was a three week sleep away camp, 21 days, they gave me 21 postcards, pre-stamped and pre addressed back to them so I could write them every one of those 21 days so they would know I'm still alive.  All I had to do was write, Dear Mom and Dad, How are you. I am fine. Love, Alan and mail it.  Well, they were disappointed they didn't get all 21 but were happy about the 6 I did mail.

[Richowens]

Alan's reaction to that speech is not so important (I don't mean it in a negative way, Alan), but the really worrisome thing is that most of the Scouts seemed to eat it up.

  The scouts' Mothers taught them to be gracious and polite. I doubt many of them know the term "BULLSHIT".

[Alan Klein]

  The scouts' Mothers taught them to be gracious and polite. I doubt many of them know the term "BULLSHIT".

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

[pegelli]

The issue is that in the middle of doing his or her duties of being a soldier, the soldier decides to go through a medical procedure to transition himself to a different sex.  The military loses him as a causality at that point because he's not fit to serve.  Will he recover in fact to even serve at all?  Will he be able to handle the job they trained him at afterwards or will they lose him entirely and have to discharge him? 

I can agree with this logic, even commercial companies don't hire people they know for sure they will miss significant future time due to illness.

But what about a transgender that went through his/her operation, is now healthy, mentally stable and fit to serve? Reading Trump's tweets my understanding is that if (s)he applies (s)he still can't get into the military. I can't see an objective (non-prejudiced) reason to deny this application just because the person has undergone a successful sex change. There might be other reasons as they test him or her that (s)he doesn't qualify, but that is equally true for all other applicants.

[Schewe]

Or transgenders who associate with a differnt sex but have no desire or need for gender confirmation surgery?

The money aspect is bogus...if they wanted to save money quit paying the $40 million the armed services pay for viagra each year...(like $6 mil is gonna make a difference to a budget of $600 billion)

The whole thing was another red herring tossed out by Trump's reality game show..."who gets pissed off or on today".

[Alan Klein]

I can agree with this logic, even commercial companies don't hire people they know for sure they will miss significant future time due to illness.

But what about a transgender that went through his operation, is now healthy, mentally stable and fit to serve? Reading Trump's tweets my understanding is that if (s)he applies (s)he still can't get into the military. I can't see an objective (non-prejudiced) reason to deny his application just because the person has undergone a successful sex change. There might be other reasons as they test him or her that (s)he doesn't qualify, but that is equally true for all other applicants.

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. 

[Alan Klein]

Or transgenders who associate with a differnt sex but have no desire or need for gender confirmation surgery?

The money aspect is bogus...if they wanted to save money quit paying the $40 million the armed services pay for viagra each year...(like $6 mil is gonna make a difference to a budget of $600 billion)

The whole thing was another red herring tossed out by Trump's reality game show..."who gets pissed off or on today".

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.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

White House divisions on display with Scaramucci's comments
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-scaramucci-idUSKBN1AC2XU?il=0

QUOTE July 27, 2017 / 8:44 PM  "WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The rifts inside President Donald Trump's White House were on startling display on Thursday, as his new communications director urged Trump's chief of staff to state publicly that he does not leak information to the media.

Anthony Scaramucci, a New York financier who last week became the White House communications chief, also compared his relationship with Trump's chief of staff, Reince Priebus, to a pair of brothers from the Bible, one of whom killed the other.

Scaramucci said last week he and Priebus were friends and "a little bit like brothers, where we rough each other up once in a while, which is totally normal for brothers."

On Thursday, Scaramucci said in an interview with CNN: "When I said we were brothers from the podium, that's because we're rough on each other. Some brothers are like Cain and Abel. Other brothers can fight with each other and get along. I don't know if this is repairable or not. That will be up to the president."

Scaramucci appeared to suggest in a Twitter post late on Wednesday that Priebus may have had a hand in what Scaramucci described as a "leak" of his official financial disclosure documents to the U.S. news organization Politico.

Politico said the information was not a leak but was publicly accessible. "


It looks like this is only the beginning of more ugly things.

Cheers,
Bart

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Top U.S. general says no changes yet to transgender policy
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-military-transgender-exclusive-idUSKBN1AC2FN?il=0

QUOTE  July 27, 2017 / 5:05 PM  "WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States' top general told the military on Thursday there had been no change yet to Pentagon policy on transgender personnel, after President Donald Trump's announcement of his plans to ban them appeared to catch senior officers by surprise.

Marine General Joseph Dunford, chairman of the military's Joint Chiefs of Staff, began his note to service chiefs, commanders and senior enlisted leaders by acknowledging the uncertainty that followed Trump's announcement.

"I know there are questions about yesterday's announcement on the transgender policy by the President," Dunford wrote.

"There will be no modifications to the current policy until the President's direction has been received by the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary has issued implementation guidance," Dunford said in the message, first reported by Reuters.

Dunford then made the assurance that the U.S. military would "treat all of our personnel with respect." The message neither voiced support nor opposition to Trump's decision.

Trump made his announcement on Wednesday morning in a series of Twitter postings, saying he would ban transgender people from the U.S. military, a move appealing to some in his conservative political base but creating vast uncertainty for active-duty and reserve transgender service members, who say they number in the thousands.

The Trump administration on Thursday told a U.S. appeals court in New York that federal law does not ban discrimination against gay employees, a sharp reversal of the position Democratic former President Barack Obama took.

[...]

Trump's tweets stoked alarm among some senior military officers and Pentagon civilians, who were caught off guard by it, three general officers in two services said early on Thursday.

"I hope our commander in chief understands that we don't transmit orders via Twitter, and that he can't, either," one said by telephone, speaking on the condition of anonymity."


It's all a diversion from the hearings of Jared Kushner, Don Trump Jr, and Paul Manafort, and the failed repeal of the ACA.

Cheers,
Bart