When Don’t Ask Don’t Tell became law, Lt. Col. Robert Bateman supported the policy. Not because he had anything wrong with gays, he says, but because not having DADT would mean he’d spend too much time (and the military too much money) training soldiers not to be bigots. Keeping gays in the closet solved all that. So he maintained his personal support of the law — until men in his company spotted one of their own leaving a gay bar. That changed everything.
We’ll let Bateman tell the whole story here, but it goes like this: The man he refers to as Sgt. X was a mechanic, “specializing in the maintenance and repair of the complex Bradley Fighting Vehicles.” But when soldiers saw him leaving an Austin gay bar, and “nobody said a word” on the ride back to Ft. Hood, he disappeared. “He emptied his personal gear from his room (leaving all his military-issued gear behind) and deserted the Army that he had so faithfully served for six years. And with his departure, the Army lost all its investments in time, training and experience that had gone into making Sgt. X the good mechanic and fine soldier he was.”
And that was enough for Bateman to start his “reconsideration” of DADT.
I did a rough, back-of-the-envelop calculation and realized that the U.S. government probably sank more than $2 million, directly or indirectly, into Sgt. X. Two million in federal tax money, flushed down the drain in an instant by don’t ask, don’t tell.
And I thought, “What could I do to train and prepare my men for combat with an extra $2 million?” Even if I spent half of it on things like additional training to keep people from acting on their anti-gay bigotry, some modifications to the barracks, etc., I’d still have plenty left to make my men more fit to fight.
That changed my mind.
My initial assumptions about the costs of allowing gays to serve versus the potential benefits were wrong. I was wrong. Since 1994, we have lost almost 14,000 trained servicepeople to this law. Quite a few of them — I would guess an overwhelming majority of them — were valuable careerists like Sgt. X. (A one-enlistment serviceperson isn’t likely to get caught in the very short time he’s in. A career serviceman or officer is, over the years, both more valuable and more expensive, and more likely to get “caught.”) And these 14,000 are only the ones we can count because we deliberately threw them out. We really have no idea, nor any way to track, how many more left in the way Sgt. X did.
So don’t repeal DADT because it’s the right thing to do. Do it because it’s the economical thing to do.
Henry Holland
So don’t repeal DADT because it’s the right thing to do. Do it because it’s the economical thing to do
Well, that’s the number one priority in this country, $$$$$, so if that leads to DADT dying a horrible hideous death, then so be it.
delurker
Who cares if reason for repealing have nothing to do with actual support of right?
During the 50s and 60s, the State Department argued for integration and civil rights because the Soviets used it as propaganda to paint the US as a fucked up country.
AlanInSLCUtah
@Henry Holland:
I Agree 100%!
Dealwithreality
This is an awesome argument for repeal, one of which would definitely sink through some thick skulls.
Bring it as a financial issue, use the opposition’s terms and figures against them. Hopefully, Ideally, this will lead reconsideration to other forms of discrimination.
B
“But when soldiers saw him leaving an Austin gay bar, and ‘nobody said a word’ on the ride back to Ft. Hood, he disappeared.”
…. guess he didn’t think of the obvious excuse, “I had to pee.”
That one works as long as the guy doesn’t walk out with a boyfriend in tow.
ewe
That’s right. Repent. Whatever it takes to repeal is fine with me.
Brian En Guarde
It is so funny how you hear politicians claim government waste and pork, but how discrimination and dishonor of loyal veterans is something that this country can afford. It shows how far behind this nation has slipped.
Jaroslaw
Agree with everything said – but as so many other posts by this site have said – the military will probably have to “study it” for 25 more years…. Sad for so many reasons.
chango
He should have said he was asking the lesbians for tank maintenance advice.
terrwill
While I appreciate the support. I can see within five minutes that some rightwing scumbag lunatic legislator drafting a bill that would make the Gay soldiers financially responsible for their training……There is some astronomical sum calculated to train the arabic translators. For some reason there is a very high percentage of Gay soldiers who adopt that particular job, the dialects are incredibly difficult to master and it takes years to become fluent. Yet the military continues to discharge these soldiers. And being that there is kinda sorta a lot of dangerous operations going on in those areas one would think we might just want to know what the enemy is saying…….
Better to hate on the Gays than to insure the safety of our soldiers.
DR
Money IS one of the concerns mentioned. DADT proceedings are expensive, not counting the costs associated with training a soldier only to have a him/her tossed out of the military. It’s an angle which is being worked.
Bob R
@terrwill: I read somewhere, some time ago, that the military has tried to recoup money spent training and educating homosexuals who were forced out of the military. I think this stopped when DADT became the law. Before DADT, you had to legally declare you were not a homosexual nor did you have homosexual tendencies. This declaration was part of the written enlistment contract. Military personal that were caught, or admitted later to being gay could have been charged with a fraudulent enlistment and ordered to repay the government for training and education. During the years I served, if you were charged with being a homosexual (usually one or more UCMJ articles 83-84-107-120 and 125), you were actually jailed and Dishonorably Discharged. I seem to remember this happened with a graduate of the military academy (they wanted him to repay the cost of his tuition/books, etc) and another officer who had attended medical school or nursing school on the military’s dime, only to be discharged for being gay. So it has been tried, with what success I really don’t know. But now, under DADT I don’t think the military would have much of a chance to recoup anything other than their government issued property.
Damon
Umm, I am gay man who supports the DADT policy. We will save MILLIONS by avoiding the same-sex harassment lawsuits that will surely come if gays are allowed to serve openly in the US military, haha. Sometimes you guys just don’t think; you pretend that gay men wouldn’t possibly use their position in the ranks to try and pressure others for sex. Think about it….
BamBam
@Damon:
Better Trolls, Please!
chango
@BamBam:
yeah, according to his blog:
“I have been everything; I was a Mormon, communist, Democrat, athiest, witch, and now I am a die-hard Christian and Republican”
le sigh
delurker
@chango: who cares about him? he’s fat.
delurker
@Damon: isome surveys state about 1/3 of women in the military have been sexually assaulted or raped by other men in the military. somehow the litigation has not clogged the court system. think about it.
Lukas P.
Straight guys have been known to enter and leave gay bars: reasons include:
+ Didn’t know it was a gay bar.
+ Followed a hot girl in there. Well, I think it was a girl….
+ Only place around with 3 buck pitchers of beer and free hot wings!
+ My brother’s a gay, and he was buying me shots and beers
+ On Thursdays they advertised they have “strippers and porn”
+ Imma trying to convert them to het-u-ro-sex-shal-u-ty
+ The sign said “Cowboys welcum”
In all seriousness, is being seen leaving a gay bar grounds for expulsion under DADT?
@terrwill: It’s not just the Arabic translators getting kicked out. It’s been speakers of Afghani languages [Dari and Pasthtu, maybe others] as well. The severe shortage of linguists has meant that lots of intelligence goes untranslated, or badly translated. = Big military risk!
Jaroslaw
#16 what an ignorant comment. First everything on this site is NOT about looks
and Two the guy in the photo is not even “Sgt. X” it is just a generic photo and he isn’t even fat. Look again, that is not a gut you see. At first glance it might look like it, but it isn’t.
DR
@Damon, if you believe that openly gay men in the service will just engage in sexual assaults, you have never been near a gay soldier. I have, and you’re wrong. And a really bad troll.
@Lukas and Terrwill: It’s not just linguists, it’s men and women from ALL divisions. I have a friend being discharged right now who is a military chaplain ordained by the UCC. Imagine how the men feel losing him!
scott ny'er
@Jaroslaw: dude, he was talking about the poster’s picture, not the picture above. Y’know the one who said he’s gay and for DADT.
Cam
No. 13 · Damon
Umm, I am gay man who supports the DADT policy. We will save MILLIONS by avoiding the same-sex harassment lawsuits that will surely come if gays are allowed to serve openly in the US military, haha. Sometimes you guys just don’t think; you pretend that gay men wouldn’t possibly use their position in the ranks to try and pressure others for sex. Think about it….
_____________________
Damon, if you’re going to come in here and lie about being gay…try not to be stupid enough to slip up in the same paragraph. You say “I am a gay man” which is usually a dead giveaway that you are straight, the Clay Aiken and Adam Lambert fans come in here and try the same thing. But later in your paragraph you say “Sometimes you guys don’t think…you pretend that gay men…..” Um, if you were gay it would be “we” and “Us”. Nice try douchebag.
DADT GUY
@Cam: Damon – you are so far off base. Harassment isn’t a gay or str8 thing and has nothing to do with DADT. Some people will use their rank to harass others regardless of sexuality OR DADT. It doesn’t matter if DADT is there or not. It has no bearing on the number of people that will be harassed by a superior. And to act like you are a gay man is pitiful. However let’s give you that — if by the off chance, you actually are gay this needs to be said to you — you have got serious problems and have not gotten over your own homophobia and self-hatred. You need to take a hard look in the mirror and ask yourself it is okay to discriminate. BTW – You already know the true answer to that question.
Ankhorite
“So don’t repeal DADT because it’s the right thing to do. Do it because it’s the economical thing to do.”
Hey, if the economic argument works on people who are deaf to the moral argument, use it.
Anti-death-penalty advocates have found that, in lieu of the obvious moral arguments, they do better with some people by explaining that it costs millions more to execute a person than it does to keep her or him alive even for many decades (because the taxpayers pay for BOTH sides of the lengthy appeals).
@Delurker: thank you for making the point in Comment #17.