The Things They Must Now Carry

by Gordon Cooper

From Broader View Weekly, January 6, 2011

Tim O’Brien wrote a very moving novel in 1990 entitled The Things They Carried. It was filled with stories about a group of soldiers during the Viet Nam conflict. He listed the many things they carried into the battlefield. Their burdens were physical, emotional and psychological weights that pressed down upon them as they tried to perform their duties. It was a telling description of the many stressors our military troops deal with on a daily basis. We should be careful to not add to the things they must carry.

I believe the lame duck Congress and President Obama have just added to the list of things our soldiers must now carry.
If one only listens to the sound bites and only reads the headlines regarding the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT), one would think our military personnel have undergone a dramatic shift in their perceptions and feelings. One would probably conclude – as Keith does – that a “warm breeze of tolerance and progress” is blowing across our military bases and battlefields. However, as with most of the news stories these days, the truth is usually buried far beneath the sound bite and the headline.
Much was made of the report commissioned by the Congress and fulfilled by the Pentagon in which a survey of active military personnel revealed 70% of respondents (by the way, less than 30% of our troops chose to respond) claimed there would be “positive, neutral or mixed” effects from the repeal. What needs to be revealed is that the report itself is close to 300 pages and the implementation plan adds another 95, and within the details of the report is the fact that nearly 60% of the combat units (i.e. the Army infantry and the Marine Corps) felt the repeal would have a negative impact on troop morale and reenlistment decisions.

We all know our military is the greatest collection of personnel, weapons and tactics that has ever existed on this planet, and we rest safely in our homes each night solely because they are “on that wall” between us and those who mean us harm. They all deserve our highest respect and honor, and we should listen to them when they tell us their concerns.

Those who choose to sign their name to an enlistment form do so with the knowledge that certain things are going to change for them after the ink dries on that dotted line. They will no longer be free to choose their own hairstyle or color of clothing. Certain behaviors and modes of conduct will be prohibited. They will be expected to sacrifice their preferences and their orientations for the sake of unity and troop morale.

The DADT policy was initiated during the Clinton administration to allow those with homosexual tendencies to serve in the armed forces as long as their preferences and orientations were not made public because it was determined that such knowledge would disrupt the above-mentioned unity and troop morale. This policy had nothing to do with “fear and hatred” (as Keith likes to claim) but more with the reality that sexual relationships tend to add more burdens to the over-burdened soldier and commander in the field of battle.

The repeal of DADT will turn the focus of our military leaders away from the task of fighting real enemies and toward defending themselves from our own soldiers and citizens as a myriad of lawsuits will most definitely be filed. In fact, a report published on npr.org (npr.org/2010/12/27/132366702/legal-questions-linger-after-‘Don’t-Ask’-repeal) mentions that the ACLU has several lawsuits involving soldiers who have lost their positions ready to file as well as plans to use legal battles to force the military to recognize same-sex spouses for benefits.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates admits that implementation of the repeal will cause disruption and likens it to the five-year transition that took place during the military’s racial integration process. He also admits that the introduction of females into the military still causes problems.

“We have a continuing problem with sexual assault.” Gates said, referring to the issue of females in the military and then added. “I think the report is honest in saying we will have some disruption [if DADT is repealed].”

We should not use our armed forces as a social experiment. There are several other institutions with which we can teach diversity and tolerance. Our military is designed to work best when everyone wears the same uniform and works as a unified force. No differentiation is allowed if unity is to be achieved.

I have always been impressed by the men and women who serve our nation in the armed forces. It seems they all lose their identity as they go through their basic training so they can assume a new identity as a soldier. For the rest of their lives they accept the fact that they are no longer the individual they were before they “joined up”. They all refer to themselves by their branch of service as their first identity. Obviously, this new identity is necessary for troop unity.

It is easy to see how this unity would not be accomplished if everybody identified themselves first according to their sexual orientation.