Wednesday, July 26, 2017

Trump's Military: No Transsexuals

By Douglas V. Gibbs
Author, Speaker, Instructor, Radio Host

In June, President Donald Trump's Defense Secretary Mad Dog Jim Mattis had made a comment that he was considering allowing transsexuals to continue to enter into the United States Military, a decision the Trump administration had delayed for six months.  Allowing "transgender" people into the military for active service was the policy under President Barack Obama.  Mattis stated he wanted to study the impact the decision would have before allowing such a policy to be implemented.

A gentleman, yesterday morning, at a breakfast meeting I attended, who remembered World War II as a young man, and served in the U.S. Army, said, "If I am in a foxhole, the enemy wants to kill me, and the person who has my back has me guessing because he's wearing high heels and stockings as he looks at my butt, it's not going to be a very well-disciplined military."

As I said when it comes to women in combat, and homosexuals serving openly in the military, in combat situations, hesitation kills.  Women and homosexuals present a plethora of challenges and hesitations.  If the unit is not a closely knit brotherhood, people will die.  Unit cohesion creates a condition where the unit is more likely to be successful in its mission.  Any distractions that challenges that unit cohesion creates hesitancy and an opportunity for the mind to deviate from its training, which then leads to unit failure, and death.
According to the New York Times: President Trump nipped all of the worry about transsexuals in the military, for now, by announcing this morning that the United States will not “accept or allow” transgender people in the United States military, saying American forces “must be focused on decisive and overwhelming victory” and could not afford to accommodate them. 
Mr. Trump made the surprise declaration in a series of posts on Twitter, saying he had come to the decision after talking to generals and military experts whom he did not name.
“After consultation with my generals and military experts, please be advised that the United States government will not accept or allow transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. military,” Mr. Trump wrote. “Our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail.” 
The sweeping policy decision reverses the gradual transformation of the military under President Barack Obama, whose administration announced last year that transgender people could serve openly in the military. Mr. Obama’s defense secretary, Ashton B. Carter, also opened all combat roles to women and appointed the first openly gay Army secretary.
Trump's decision follows a debate in Congress regarding the policy also leftover from the Obama era requiring the Pentagon to pay for medical treatment related to genital mutilation for the purpose of changing one's outward gender appearance.  The potential bill's cost is already nearly $700 billion in a spending bill designed to fund the Pentagon, and in it, Representative Vicky Hartzler, Republican of Missouri, proposed an amendment that would bar the Pentagon from spending money on transition surgery or related hormone therapy.

A measure barring Pentagon money from being used for genital mutilation for gender change buffoonery failed last month after a few turncoat Republicans voted with the Democrats on it.*

According to the New York Times, of the 1.3 million active duty personnel serving, about 2,450 are "transgender", a number I believe is probably much higher than the actual number.  We'll chalk it up to manipulating the news for their own benefit.

* The Republican Platform is a good one.  Any Republican who does not vote in line with the platform should not only be removed from office, but removed from the party due to their unwillingness to abide by the platform.  If the GOP were to adjust their party platform away from its constitutional foundation, I would then remove myself from the party without looking back.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

No comments: