AztecDave wrote:deselby wrote:AztecDave wrote:As an Army veteran going on my 25th year of service, I can only say this is just more pure PC bullshit foisted upon the military by persons who do not have the slightest clue a to what is good, or bad, for the military. The current administration has its social agenda, and that's all that counts. It's infinately worse with Obama as president than it was under Clinton. At least he liked pussy. The Army's number one goal now is Diversity. Like that will save us from every evil in the world. Makes me want to puke. The current brass is so emanored with this idea it's beyond silly. It's as if they expect all of our enemies will quiver and fall to their knees in the awesomeness that is our Diversity. If this Sikh's language skills are so fucking critical, why is he a medic & not a HUMINT collector or a CI agent? And if this guy really wants to embrace Diversity, let him be roomates with the first fag that gets to suck cock on Army time. Christ, I cannot wait til I can retire.
Calm down, this was done back in the 70s under President Ford, having Sikhs with turbans in the army. There were some flaming gay guys in back then, too.
They also passed a law to allow yarmulkes for military personnel, it hasn't brought the military down.
The Navy allowed beards when Reagan was president, it also didn't open the door to invasion.
The guy's a medic because he wanted to be a medic, remember guaranteed MOS training in the enlistment contract?
Have you ever served in the military? Didn't think so. You don't know what you are talking about.
Well, I was able to get guaranteed MOS training when I enlisted, I know that.
I know that the sight of a turban makes certain kinds of personalities' blood boil.
But in fairness, there is one reason I can think of not to allow Sikh turbans and beards in the U.S. Army - the sight of them in Afghanistan will cause rumors of Indian influence and control in the U.S. Army.
Elsewhere, it doesn't matter, in my opinion.