patrick.net

What's wrong with using drug addicts and mentally deranged individuals as front line cannon fodder?

President Trump's decision to continue military misadventures that he had campaigned on curtailing, combined with his unconstitutional ban against transgendered persons, appears to have driven recruiters to extreme measures. Some transgendered persons have distinguished themselves in military service, for example:

"Kristin Beck, formerly Chris, served 20 years as a SEAL and fought on some of the most dangerous battlefields in the world, but after she left the service she realized she wasn't living the life she wanted.

"Chris really wanted to be a girl and felt that she was a girl and consolidated that identity very early on in childhood," said Anne Speckhard, co-author of Beck's biography "Warrior Princess," which was published over the weekend. Speckhard told ABC News Beck suppressed that secret for decades, however, through the trials of SEAL training and the harrowing missions that followed, growing a burly beard as she fought on the front lines of American special operations."

The armed forces faced similar problems during the era of "Don't Ask, Don't tell." They were required to discharge anyone found to be gay, despite their own admission that these included some of the best in the command, and a Rand study finding those discharged were on average more qualified than their peers at recruitment. Recruiters had to recruit school dropouts and felons, in order to replace active duty personnel who were much better qualified and would be eligible to serve today. Bigotry has unfortunate consequences.

There are options for the MillXYers yet, all is not lost!

Sounds like a great opportunity for all patnetters!

So that's where Sergeant Dan is.

Perhaps the US is building its own jihadi force?

lostand confused says

Perhaps the US is building its own jihadi force?

Knowing Dan, he probably joined the Muslim Jihadis to fight the Christians, because they did something bad 1,200 years ago.

What about Jazz? He must have joined the Venezuelan army to fight against the Capitalists.
Just wait till he finds out his monthly 1,000,000 bolivar check is only worth $29.00.

This is clearly part of the right wing lobby. Get guns and training into the hands of the mentally ill and then claim they are the problem with gun violence when the troops come home. Denying them mental healthcare is important as well. Gotta admit the Republicans have their ducks in a row.

It's all Obama's fault!

Strategist says

Knowing Dan, he probably joined the Muslim Jihadis to fight the Christians, because they did something bad 1,200 years ago.

He's been gone a month and you're still writing about him. You must miss him.

anon_fc62d says

Strategist says

Knowing Dan, he probably joined the Muslim Jihadis to fight the Christians, because they did something bad 1,200 years ago.

He's been gone a month and you're still writing about him. You must miss him.

Actually, I do miss him. He had some good points, some bad points etc etc. The nuttier someone gets, the more fun they become.
I'm sure he thought I was insane, but you know what? My wife thinks I am insane too, yet I have been sleeping with her for 30 years. And no, that does NOT mean I will ever want to sleep with Dan.

anon_27bdf says

What's wrong with using drug addicts and mentally deranged individuals as front line cannon fodder?

Because they'll sue for equality, and will complain that they can't be cannon fodder. Followed by equality, and demand instant admiral status upon entry.

"U.S. Army Now Taking Applicants With Histories Of Mental Illness, Drug Abuse And Self-Mutilation"

Are we talking about trannies?

blacks, hispanics, gays, trannies are accepted so why not.

Gentle Reader,

Can we hope that Hizzonor The Most High President Pouty-Poo will enlist?

Regards,
Roidy

@Patrick, in an attempt to help you reach your goal of cleaning up the site, I tried to mark posts 5,7,8 as uncivil as they are aimed at attacking a person rather than an idea, and can be deemed uncivil as their intent is to be inflammatory, but the uncivil button is gone. What gives?

errc says

@Patrick, in an attempt to help you reach your goal of cleaning up the site, I tried to mark posts 5,7,8 as uncivil as they are aimed at attacking a person rather than an idea, and can be deemed uncivil as their intent is to be inflammatory, but the uncivil button is gone. What gives?

You’ve abused the uncivil button recently by placing too many civil post into jail, so your access has been temporarily removed. Next time don’t abuse it.

Goran_K says

errc says

@Patrick, in an attempt to help you reach your goal of cleaning up the site, I tried to mark posts 5,7,8 as uncivil as they are aimed at attacking a person rather than an idea, and can be deemed uncivil as their intent is to be inflammatory, but the uncivil button is gone. What gives?

You’ve abused the uncivil button recently by placing too many civil post into jail, so your access has been temporarily removed. Next time don’t abuse it.

That’s actually a lie. I’ve only ever marked uncivil posts as uncivil. You’re just blinded by your partisanship. Don’t make uncivil posts if you don’t want them flagged as being uncivil. Next time, park your partisanship at the door before incorrectly assigning someone to your preconceived notions. In short, be smarter

Goran_K says

errc says

@Patrick, in an attempt to help you reach your goal of cleaning up the site, I tried to mark posts 5,7,8 as uncivil as they are aimed at attacking a person rather than an idea, and can be deemed uncivil as their intent is to be inflammatory, but the uncivil button is gone. What gives?

You’ve abused the uncivil button recently by placing too many civil post into jail, so your access has been temporarily removed. Next time don’t abuse it.

That’s actually a lie. I’ve only ever marked uncivil posts as uncivil. You’re just blinded by your partisanship. Don’t make uncivil posts if you don’t want them flagged as being uncivil. Next time, park your partisanship at the door before incorrectly assigning someone to your preconceived notions. In short, be smarter

Goran_K says

errc says

@Patrick, in an attempt to help you reach your goal of cleaning up the site, I tried to mark posts 5,7,8 as uncivil as they are aimed at attacking a person rather than an idea, and can be deemed uncivil as their intent is to be inflammatory, but the uncivil button is gone. What gives?

You’ve abused the uncivil button recently by placing too many civil post into jail, so your access has been temporarily removed. Next time don’t abuse it.

It’s amazing that you can find the time to answer questions directed to someone else, but can’t be bothered to answer questions asked if you directly. Why do you think that is?

What questions?

Goran_K says

What questions?

You’ve dodged too many to list, and you’re not going to waste my time trying to troll me. Go back and read the threads, i know you’ve seen the questions and intentionally dodged answering them, I’m sure it’s because you know that answering them honestly makes you look bad.

I can’t answer a question if you refuse to post the question. In my Venezuela thread I answered all of your questions so I’m not sure which questions I dodged.

As long as they don't recruit Realtor's.

errc says

@Patrick, in an attempt to help you reach your goal of cleaning up the site, I tried to mark posts 5,7,8 as uncivil as they are aimed at attacking a person rather than an idea, and can be deemed uncivil as their intent is to be inflammatory, but the uncivil button is gone. What gives?

I don't have a dog in the fight @Patrick but @errc is right on these comments if we're going to take the rules as stated. I actually found Strat's post pretty funny on this thread, so I don't personally mind them, but we're on a slippery slop here. Can there be a humor element to it? Probably not. I don't interpret this as Strat "attacking" Dan or Jazz, and I think they would admit that. But when taking the comments at their face value, it could be considered an attack by an outsider that hasn't read this forum.

We're fully engulfed in the dark underbelly of moderation. I'm not sure what the other side looks like, but these comments are a perfect example of a gray area.

WookieMan says

I don't have a dog in the fight @Patrick but @errc is right on these comments if we're going to take the rules as stated. I actually found Strat's post pretty funny on this thread, so I don't personally mind them, but we're on a slippery slop here. Can there be a humor element to it? Probably not. I don't interpret this as Strat "attacking" Dan or Jazz, and I think they would admit that. But when taking the comments at their face value, it could be considered an attack by an outsider that hasn't read this forum.

We're fully engulfed in the dark underbelly of moderation. I'm not sure what the other side looks like, but these comments are a perfect example of a gray area.

Patrick gave a clearer description of what he expected in moderating comments. It's not zero tolerance any longer. A few "off color" comments can go, but if it becomes back and forth attacks, they are followed by warnings, deletions, and then bans.

I'm not a mod here, so whoever handles #misc would be the judge in this case.