A good move

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Xenophon,

I think that's a huge credit to Senator McCain that, as an older person he can change his stance or view on a social issue. I know as I get older I definitely feel fussier toward everything. I think it's a real credit to him that he's 80 and is willing to realize he might've not had it all figured out.

Then again he could just be a politician and is simply shifting his position to reflect that of his electorate. Who knows.

- Doc

[_subgenius]

You are addressing a military retiree. I'm afraid that your lack of respect for his time, service, education and experiences is in direct correlation to your poor showing on this thread.

That is to say, you don't give a damn.

I do not have to agree with him to respect his service and his service does not make him correct or incorrect on this issue.
The irony is that neither of you seem to care that the commander in chief is the head of our military and currently serves our country. CCC would likely receive the same respect he gives....but obviously his, and possibly your sense of entitlement is just a matter of convenience and not principle.

[_subgenius]

The question was based on a direct quote from Mattis himself.

The rest of your babble is entirely irrelevant to the issue at hand. It's always a good idea to choose making sense over simply making noise.

Please babble out the part in the OP that introduced readiness/lethality

[_Xenophon]

I'm in full agreement with that, Doc. Regardless of age it can be very difficult to change our minds, especially if we have a vested interest.

As to the politician part, given his recent diagnosis, the fact that he just won reelection and he is already enjoying bipartisan popularity both nationally and at home I don't see him as really needing to appeal to his electorate too much.

Honestly he probably would have scored more points by going out and being the deciding vote against opening debate on healthcare instead of just grandstanding after casting his "aye".

[_Xenophon]

Please babble out the part in the OP that introduced readiness/lethality

Literally from the freakin' article that you posted without reading

Earlier this month, for instance, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis announced that there would be a six-month delay in implementing recruitment policies for transgender Americans so that military chiefs could determine how they would affect the force’s “readiness or lethality.”

[_The CCC]

Blacks weren't denied service for medical reasons. A person could be denied for any various medical circumstance that is deemed to be a cost to the military. For example, having a bunion that will eventually require surgery is a reason a person would be denied admission to service.
Get over yourself and get an education on at least one topic around here...your constant google-cut-n-paste scrambling to support whatever knee jerk reaction you seem to always have when your stodgy and cursory opinions are challenged and/or proven wrong.

Blacks were denied being in the service for YOUR Racist dumb ass reason. There was a whole cottage industry for selling the idea that blacks were mentally/spiritually inferior and barely human if at all.
Your God Damn state of Tennessee murdered black soldiers in the Civil War while detaining white ones.

From Wiki
On July 26, 1948, President Harry S. Truman signed Executive Order 9981 integrating the military and mandating equality of treatment and opportunity. It also made it illegal, per military law, to make a racist remark. Desegregation of the military was not complete for several years, and all-black Army units persisted well into the Korean War. The last all-black unit wasn't disbanded until 1954.

In 1950, Lieutenant Leon Gilbert of the still-segregated 24th Infantry Regiment was court martialed and sentenced to death for refusing to obey the orders of a white officer while serving in the Korean War. Gilbert maintained that the orders would have meant certain death for himself and the men in his command. The case led to worldwide protests and increased attention to segregation and racism in the U.S. military. Gilbert's sentence was commuted to twenty and later seventeen years of imprisonment; he served five years and was released.

The integration commanded by Truman's 1948 Executive Order extended to schools and neighborhoods as well as military units. Fifteen years after the Executive Order, Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara issued Department of Defense Directive 5120.36. "Every military commander", the Directive mandates, "has the responsibility to oppose discriminatory practices affecting his men and their dependents and to foster equal opportunity for them, not only in areas under his immediate control, but also in nearby communities where they may gather in off-duty hours."[66] While the directive was issued in 1963, it was not until 1967 that the first non-military establishment was declared off-limits. In 1970 the requirement that commanding officers first obtain permission from the Secretary of Defense was lifted, and areas were allowed to be declared housing areas off limits to military personnel by their commanding officer.[67]

Since the end of military segregation and the creation of an all-volunteer army, the American military saw the representation of African Americans in its ranks rise precipitously.[68]

Being transgender isn't a medical issue you stupid troll. As Senator Orrin Hatch said they born that way.
SEE https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 512333001/

It has nothing to do with costs either. The US Military spends 5 times the money on Viagra than on trans people.

[_Maksutov]

Please babble out the part in the OP that introduced readiness/lethality

Literally from the freakin' article that you posted without reading

Earlier this month, for instance, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis announced that there would be a six-month delay in implementing recruitment policies for transgender Americans so that military chiefs could determine how they would affect the force’s “readiness or lethality.”

Subby isn't interested in reading, or thinking. He's here to push whatever buttons he can. It amuses him but it also is the limit of his capacity.

[_The CCC]

That is to say, you don't give a damn.

I do not have to agree with him to respect his service and his service does not make him correct or incorrect on this issue.
The irony is that neither of you seem to care that the commander in chief is the head of our military and currently serves our country. CCC would likely receive the same respect he gives....but obviously his, and possibly your sense of entitlement is just a matter of convenience and not principle.[/quote]

I've had one Commander-in-Chief; Richard Nixon when I was in the military. I firmly believe in civilian control of the military. Drumpf didn't serve in the military. He was too busy avoiding a VD's to bother. That being said any President who disrespects our military, and those that serve in to the extent that Drumpf does it, doesn't deserve the title of President.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Well, here's another credible person speaking up about the transgender policy:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/exclusive-to ... iness.html

The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Marine General Joseph Dunford, said in a written message on Thursday to military leaders that there has been no change yet to the military's policy on transgender personnel, despite plans for a ban announced by President Donald Trump.

"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 written message to service chiefs, commanders and senior enlisted leaders, first reported by Reuters.

"In the meantime, we will continue to treat all of our personnel with respect. As importantly, given the current fight and the challenges we face, we will all remain focused on accomplishing our assigned missions."

What I'm wondering is if military readiness and whatever is potentially degraded by having Blacks, Women, Gay, Immigrants, transgendered personnel why are able to accomplish our military mission? Why are we the most lethal military in the history of mankind?

- Doc

[_Maksutov]

Yeah, let's get rid of the trans people. And the gays. And the Muslims. And the women. Might as well get rid of the Jews and the Atheists and the Catholics and the Mormons, people are uncomfortable around them too...the Bill of Rights doesn't apply to them...whining pussy AntiAmerican snowflakes...