Don’t Vote on Don’t Ask, says Pentagon; Obama agrees "let the DOD study finish"

[Bluebear]

U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates wrote a letter to Congress on Friday, once again asking them not to vote on a repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell until the Pentagon has completed their review of the policy. The delay is ostensibly to ensure a more seamless transition from outright ban, to repeal. Gay rights activists, along with Speaker Nancy Pelosi, have encouraged an immediate halt to all dismissals from the military where homosexuality is concerned, while the ban is being reviewed.

But Gates, along with co-signer Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff – whom both stand in opposition to the ban – feel differently. Gates wrote in response to an inquiry from House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton (D-Mo.)

Repealing the policy before the military completes its review, “would send a very damaging message to our men and women in uniform that in essence, their views, concerns and perspectives do not matter on an issue with such a direct impact and consequence for them and their families,” Gates said.

Senator Joseph Lieberman, and other lawmakers remain anxious to end the ban before the Pentagon completes its review. President Obama, reports the Washington Post, continues to support repeal, but wishes for the review to be completed.

Later Friday White House Spokesman Tommy Vietor said, “The President’s commitment to repealing don’t ask, don’t tell is unequivocal. This is not a question of if, but how. That’s why we’ve said that the implementation of any congressional repeal will be delayed until the DOD study of how best to implement that repeal is completed. The President is committed to getting this done both soon and right.”

http://blogout.justout.com/?p=17267

[sailor65]

1. Has he frozen discharges yet?

I haven't seen it.

[Bluebear]

2. Absolutely NOT.

[sailor65]

6. I didn't think so.

He would be believable as a "Supporter" if he at least did that one simple thing entirely in his power. Otherwise, his words of support are rather hollow.

[Bluebear]

18. Minus the rather.

With every day it becomes clearer.

[sailor65]

19. I wasn't 100% sure from your other response,

but I get you on this one. You sound terribly disillusioned and that's sad because it's a story being repeated way too often. And I'd have to agree there is not much room for optimism on this particular issue.

[Bluebear]

20. I'm up to here

(pointing)

with the way this Administration has treated the GLBT constituency.

[zipplewrath]

3. Nope

He should halt all investigations until the review is complete. Once it is complete, based upon the recommendations, and congressional actions, he can either restart them, or find them obsolete.

[sailor65]

7. Yes he could,

and he needs the permission or consensus of no one to do it. The fact that he still hasn't makes many people seriously question his support.

[Bluebear]

13. I don't question his support.

I think it's rather obvious what the situation is.

[Canuckistanian]

4. What is there to study?

Unequivocal fact: there are gays in the military NOW. If they were a real problem, they'd be kicked out.

And as vets and active military servicemembers say, everybody knows who they are - and don't care. Except for a very few who "just don't like the situation".

Therefore, letting them stay will make no difference.

[zipplewrath]

5. They have rules for everything

Between traditions and the rules in general, they have alot of paperwork to change. If it were me, I'd tell them to take the year to write the new rules. In the mean time, stop investigations.

[Canuckistanian]

24. Quite right. The "rules" don't mandate investigations

Investigations are discretionary. They can be ignored when "expedient".

For instance, when the CIC requests it.

[gratuitous]

8. So, moving too quickly "would send a very damaging message"

But moving too slowly is just fine? Gee, between being sensitive to the the "concerns and perspectives" of bigots and affording equal protection under law to all citizens, what ever should we do? Goodness! Such a conundrum.

Maybe it's time we did away with standing armies. Their existence is apparently just too alluring for the commander-in-chief (whoever it is) to resist using.

[FreeState]

11. And moving slowly sends what message to LGBT citizens?

Oh right I forgot - what straight people think is more important.

Im so sick of this - since when does the military high command take orders from the lower ranks? I thought commands came from the top down!

[Bluebear]

15. One would think.

[frylock]

9. fierce advocate for foot dragging..

teh study, we must finish teh study. :eyes:

[ScreamingMeemie]

10. And yet they are still discharging soldiers, correct?

Shame on him.

[bigwillq]

12. .....

:thumbsup:

[Bluebear]

14. ....

:thumbsup:

[riderinthestorm]

23. +1. K & R. nt

[unhappycamper30]

26. K&R

Shameful.

[Ratty]

16. I can see waiting for the study, but no moratorium is unforgiveable n/t

[Bluebear]

17. Oh? What do they need to "study"?

Every "study" has already been accomplished. This is nothing but waiting for the GOP to take one of the chambers so the DADT repeal is killed for another decade.

[MilesColtrane]

21. On a related note, why the hell isn't Wes Clark the Secretary of Defense by now?

He's eligible.
He's an improvement over Gates.
He's a Democrat.
He doesn't carry the taint of a Bush appointee and the subsequent policies that he put in place.

Just one more reason I am disappointed in Obama's follow through at the halfway point.

"I believe that the military needs to rethink the 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy. It does not serve this country to discriminate against people who want to serve in our armed forces. I would ask the military to craft and implement a policy that ensures that everyone who wants to serve their country is permitted to do so with honor and dignity." - Wes Clark

[Bluebear]

22. + and thank you for that Clark quote

[ScreamingMeemie]

25. That is the quote that made me think differently about Wes Clark.

I had wondered about his intentions. Worried about an Lieberman type, and then he said that. God I miss our 2004 Primary candidates.

[Egnever]

28. interesting question

Would love to see it.

[BlueIris]

27. Pathetic. Bigotry sucks. nt