Is fulfilling campaign promise worth compromising military effectiveness?Posted: November 30, 2010 11:50 pm Eastern
By Brian Fitzpatrick Â© 2010 WorldNetDaily
WASHINGTON â€“ At a news conference introducing the long-awaited Pentagon report on permitting open homosexuals to serve in the military, representatives of the Obama administration and top military officers were unable to name a single benefit that would result from the change.
But they did acknowledge the military would encounter some risks and "temporary" disruptions due to widespread opposition among the troops, particularly among chaplains and soldiers serving in ground combat and special operations units.
Administration representatives acknowledged that as many as 60 percent of Marine warriors oppose repealing the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy.
"You don't proceed with a policy with that level of opposition just to deliver on a promise the president made to LGBT groups," said Elaine Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness.
"Not one good reason has been presented why the military should do this," Donnelly told WND. "No benefits at all. They say there's only a small risk. Why have any risk? There is no reason to impose this risk on the people who are serving."
"No one is supporting this out of a feeling it will benefit the military. The whole purpose of the change is to reward a radical constituency for the administration," said retired Army Col. Dick Black.
Read More: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=234945