• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

Trump Bans Transgender Military Recruits

I love the "it's such a small percentage of the population" reasoning. Apply that argument to infringing upon the rights of assault weapons owners and their heads explode.

you might want to read up on analogy as this is a BS comparison. #1 the bolded part is BS sewage that doesn't actually describe the function of the items you think it does. #2 even if we were to accept the BS definition of "assault weapons" that percentage is way higher than you think it is.
 
All the services separate people involuntarily all the time. I had to leave the Army involuntarily due to an injury. Some are put out of the service for discipline problems or simply the lack of ability to adapt to military life. Hell in the 90s the Army jacked up the promotion scores to unattainable levels and separated thousands for not being able to get promoted to the next pay grade.

the 90's sucked to be in the military, IMO. I saw a guy with 19 years in get booted because he couldn't pass the physical anymore. Lost out on retirement.

Navy jacked up required scores, too. I took an advancement exam 3 or 4 times. All except the last time, they had people take the test even though there would be no advancement and the last time I took it, was the worst score I had ever made and they dropped the passing score so low, just about everyone advanced. Very demoralizing and part of the reason I got out.
 
Trump's shot across the bow - tweeting out that the US is banning transgenders in the military - was a rude awaking for anyone still in the dark about the President.

Really? An early morning tweet to announce this?

Trump's PR kept repeating that he had discussed this in detail with his 'national security team,' somehow insinuating that military leadership was on board. His security team is Sebastian Gorka and...Michael Flynn? No Flynn was fired, it's someone else, uhm... Sean Hannity? Jared Kushner? Scaramucci?

The morning Trump tweeted this out, they knew nothing of it at the Pentagon. Who does something like that, with our soldiers fighting on the front lines? To drop something like that, out of the blue? It's ******* reckless, no matter what you think of transgenders serving in the military. Or fronting the costs of their sex operations. The military spends 10x that on Viagra.

This tweet about transgender soldiers says everything you need to know about Trump's lack of even a rudimentary level of competence to hold the highest office.

I just hope he has handlers standing at the ready, in case he tweets out he's sending nukes to NK or something. Each passing day with Trump in office, I keep thinking I should build a steel-reinforced concrete underground bomb shelter and start hording canned goods.
 
Last edited:
Each passing day with Trump in office, I keep thinking I should build a steel-reinforced concrete underground bomb shelter and start hording canned goods.

You are contemplating moving into an underground shelter? If this is a promise, and I only speak for myself - though I feel many will join my sentiment - can I simply say please?

You put that high on the tee. Too hard to pass up.
 
Each passing day with Trump in office, I keep thinking I should build a steel-reinforced concrete underground bomb shelter and start hording canned goods.

Christ, did you see how many tweets there were from various cooks saying that very thing.....on election night? You are several months late to the lib meltdown extravaganza. They probably have room for you in the bunker, just knock first. But go with caution....their first thought will be that it's Trump coming in to get them.
 
Christ, did you see how many tweets there were from various cooks saying that very thing.....on election night? You are several months late to the lib meltdown extravagant They probably have room for you in the bunker, just knock first. But go with caution....their first thought will be hat it's Trump coming in to get them.
Yeah man, me and all the liberals are really spooked out. We've got our yogurt and our granola, so basically nothing really bad can go wrong. But we're ready in our pj's and mugs of hot chocolate. Maybe, just maybe the evil Trumpsters won't overrun our cities and States. Until then, we huddle with shaking knees and elbows.
 
You are contemplating moving into an underground shelter? If this is a promise, can I simply say please? ...I feel many will join my sentiment
I'll send out carrier pigeons and smoke signals, to make sure we stay in touch.
 
Great point Dibs, and thanks for sharing your experience.

I'm just bent each and every time the government says we can't do something. We are all americans, stop dividing and tearing down the public.

FYI, I will fight and defend the gun owners having fully automatic weapons as much as I am defending the transgendered right now. The government has no cause to tell us how we should and shouldn't live our lives.
 
I don't think the government is telling anyone how to live their lives. Just that military service probably isn't for them.
 
Imagine the history books for this era in United States history. We still have starving people, infrastructure problems, issues with education and healthcare and on the forefront of our national and state government is where you can take a dump and who can be in the military.
 
I don't think the government is telling anyone how to live their lives. Just that military service probably isn't for them.

You don't necessarily have the same Constitutional rights in the military that you do as a civilian.
 
I think it's highly unlikely that there are large numbers of people who are really pushing their kids to be transgendered, and endure all of the horrible stuff that goes with it. It was really heartbreaking for my friend, she felt as though she was losing a child. Her daughter was gone, she had to adjust to having a son with a new name, appearance etc. It's really not a walk in the park for the parents or the kid, and I don't think many people try to push it on their kids for ***** and giggles. Are there exceptions? Probably. But I doubt it's very common. Far more common that the parent completely rejects the kid.

I agree, it's an elective surgery. Some transgendered people don't ever have surgery, by choice. I don't think it's something the government, or any insurance really, should be paying for. It's not medically necessary.

It's not the parents necessarily. It's the therapist or psychologist, or school counselor that may tell the parents to encourage the child to explore changing genders.

Here is the head of John's Hopkins Phychiatry, who has studied transgenders for 40 years, saying that it hurts and does not help people who have a treatable mental illness.

Transgenderism: A Pathogenic Meme

http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2015/06/15145/

Here's a few pull quotes

The idea that one’s sex is a feeling, not a fact, has permeated our culture and is leaving casualties in its wake. Gender dysphoria should be treated with psychotherapy, not surgery.


For forty years as the University Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins Medical School—twenty-six of which were also spent as Psychiatrist in Chief of Johns Hopkins Hospital—I’ve been studying people who claim to be transgender. Over that time, I’ve watched the phenomenon change and expand in remarkable ways.

At Johns Hopkins, after pioneering sex-change surgery, we demonstrated that the practice brought no important benefits. As a result, we stopped offering that form of treatment in the 1970s.

Transgendered men do not become women, nor do transgendered women become men. All (including Bruce Jenner) become feminized men or masculinized women, counterfeits or impersonators of the sex with which they “identify.” In that lies their problematic future.

Ten to fifteen years after surgical reassignment, the suicide rate of those who had undergone sex-reassignment surgery rose to twenty times that of comparable peers.

In two states, a doctor who would look into the psychological history of a transgendered boy or girl in search of a resolvable conflict could lose his or her license to practice medicine. By contrast, such a physician would not be penalized if he or she started such a patient on hormones that would block puberty and might stunt growth.
 
Last edited:
Trump's shot across the bow - tweeting out that the US is banning transgenders in the military - was a rude awaking for anyone still in the dark about the President.

Really? An early morning tweet to announce this?

Trump's PR kept repeating that he had discussed this in detail with his 'national security team,' somehow insinuating that military leadership was on board. His security team is Sebastian Gorka and...Michael Flynn? No Flynn was fired, it's someone else, uhm... Sean Hannity? Jared Kushner? Scaramucci?

The morning Trump tweeted this out, they knew nothing of it at the Pentagon. Who does something like that, with our soldiers fighting on the front lines? To drop something like that, out of the blue? It's ******* reckless, no matter what you think of transgenders serving in the military. Or fronting the costs of their sex operations. The military spends 10x that on Viagra.

This tweet about transgender soldiers says everything you need to know about Trump's lack of even a rudimentary level of competence to hold the highest office.

I just hope he has handlers standing at the ready, in case he tweets out he's sending nukes to NK or something. Each passing day with Trump in office, I keep thinking I should build a steel-reinforced concrete underground bomb shelter and start hording canned goods.

I oft wondered, if you're the big businessman you claim to be....traveling around the world, owner of more than one company...

How are you able to devote so much time and energy to a Steelers message board?
 
Mental conditions that disqualifies one from military service:

https://www.thebalance.com/military-medical-standards-for-enlistment-and-commission-3354046

Any history or current psychosexual conditions, including, but not limited to transsexualism, exhibitionism, transvestism, voyeurism, and other paraphilias, are disqualifying.


So why not let them all in?


Hmmm just had a great idea!

That time in the military when there was segregation. Blacks had their own units...which led to the famous all black squadron of fighter pilots known as the Tuskegee airmen.

Lets put these folks and their psychosexual problems in their own units and let them prove their worth.
They'd be out of sight and out of mind.

Barney Frank could be their commander.

 
We may have another runner... Mad Dog, say it ain't so. Trump actually went ahead with this without consulting with his most senior military advisor? Just another day in the Trump reality show that may be all a dream that we'll wake up from one day.

Mattis appalled by Trump tweets announcing transgender ban: report
http://thehill.com/policy/defense/3...ts-announcing-transgender-military-ban-report

Defense Secretary James Mattis was caught off-guard by President Trump's announcement that he was banning transgender people from serving in the military, according to a New York Times report.

Mattis, who was on vacation at the time of Trump's decision, only had one day's worth of notice before Trump tweeted his announcement of the policy, the paper reported.

The report described him as "appalled."

Sources close to the defense secretary told the Times that Mattis was infuriated by the tweets, and saw them as an insult to transgender Americans currently serving in the military.

On Wednesday morning, Trump wrote on Twitter that “after consultation with my generals and military experts, please be advised that the United States government will not accept or allow transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. Military."

Mattis, according to the Times, had been quietly lobbying Republicans for months to defeat a GOP-led amendment to the 2017 spending bill that would prevent the military from spending money on transition surgery or hormone therapy for transgender service members. The report states that Mattis initially resisted the initial policy allowing transgender Americans to serve in the armed forces, but accepted that the policy was to remain in place.
 
"we have no proof, but ..."

The left no longer operates on proof. "Sources say..." is all one needs to proceed with hangings. Just look at Russia. Or ice cream. Or Ferguson. Or Baltimore. Or....or....or.

What's the statement about Liberals and Facts?
 
"we have no proof, but ..."
The left no longer operates on proof. "Sources say..." is all one needs to proceed with hangings. What's the statement about Liberals and Facts?
Sigh, why do I always have to put in the work? Facts and truth aren't that difficult to ascertain, just need to look around a little.

US Joint Chiefs blindsided by Trump's transgender ban
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/07/27/politics/trump-military-transgender-ban-joint-chiefs/index.html

<cite class="el-editorial-source">Washington (CNN)</cite>The Joint Chiefs of Staff, including chairman General Joseph Dunford, were not aware President Donald Trump planned to tweet a ban on transgender service members, three US defense officials told CNN -- the latest indication that top military leaders across all four service branches were blindsided by the President's announcement.

Defense chiefs resist Donald Trump's ban on transgender troops
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...p-transgender-ban-troops-pentagon-us-military

Dunford himself was not aware that Trump was going to announce the ban, a US official said. The official was not authorized to discuss the matter and so spoke on condition of anonymity.
Trump’s announcement caught the Pentagon flat-footed and unable to explain what it called Trump’s “guidance”.

Trump wrote that he had consulted with “my generals and military experts”, but he did not mention Mattis, the retired Marine general who recently told the service chiefs to spend another six months weighing the costs and benefits of allowing transgender individuals to enlist. At the time, Mattis said this “does not presuppose the outcome of the review”, but Trump’s tweets appeared to have done just that.

Mattis was on vacation when Trump tweeted transgender ban, and he was reportedly 'appalled' by it
http://www.businessinsider.com/mattis-vacation-appaulled-trump-trans-ban-2017-7

Mattis apparently only had one day's notice about the decision, which he had labored over for months while evaluating how to implement the Obama policy. Sources close to Mattis told the Times that he was "appalled" by Trump's rollout of the policy, which shocked many in the Pentagon and left active-duty transgender service people unsure of their fate.

The Military Is Officially Ignoring Trump’s Transgender Order
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/07/joint-chiefs-transgender-ban-military

Mattis was reportedly given very little notice of Trump’s imminent announcement about the ban, which the president argued was because the U.S. military “cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption” associated with transgender individuals in the service. But while Mattis was notified on Tuesday about the controversial policy shift, CNN reports that the Joint Chiefs only found out about the president’s order when it was suddenly tweeted out. When the Pentagon was originally asked for comment on the ban Wednesday, a spokesperson told the Associated Press that they had no information and referred all questions back to the White House.This apparent lack of communication reveals an unsettling disconnect between Trump and the military. While the White House has dismissed protocol and presidential tradition at every turn, the military relies on chain of command and formality to function properly—a troubling concern in the context of future military crises. “We grow up and learn to obey the chain of command, and my chain of command is secretary of the Army, secretary of defense, and the president,” General Mark Milley, the Army chief of staff, said at a National Press Club event on Thursday, Politico reports.

Trump ban on transgender service members alarms some military officers
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-military-transgender-exclusive-idUSKBN1AC2FN

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump's sudden decision to ban transgender personnel from serving in the military has alarmed some senior military officers who were caught off guard by it.

Trump's declaration, which came via early morning tweets on Wednesday, appeared to pre-empt an ongoing Pentagon review looking into allowing openly transgender recruits to join the military, and he drew criticism from three senior officers interviewed by Reuters on Thursday.

"I hope our commander in chief understands that we don't transmit orders via Twitter, and that he can't, either," one said by telephone, speaking on the condition of anonymity.

"Even if this were an order, implementing it legally would take considerable time, if it's even possible."


Why Didn’t Trump Warn the Pentagon About His Transgender Ban?
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slat...n_the_pentagon_about_his_transgender_ban.html

President Trump’s announcement on Twitter on Wednesday morning that he is reinstating a ban on transgender people serving in the U.S. armed forces came as a surprise to a lot of people. Most notably, it seemed to come as a shock to the Pentagon, which was already moving forward, albeit slowly, with plans to lift the ban.

<section class="about-the-author fancy inline with-head">White House officials are openly conceding that the move was motivated by electoral politics. Vice President Mike Pence and chief strategist Steve Bannon had reportedly been pushing the policy shift,and Politico reported that the president made the decision to resolve a congressional squabble in order to secure funds for his border wall. The rollout of the new policy itself was very odd, betraying a striking lack of effort to pretend this was anything other than a unilateral White House move.</section>
The Pentagon press office was unaware that this decision was coming and referred questions about it to the White House. The previous transgender policy is still on the department’s website. The Senate Armed Services Committee was reportedly caught by surprise, too, which raised the ire of committee chairman Sen. John McCain, who called it “unclear” and “yet another example of why major policy announcement should not be made via Twitter.”

Secretary of Defense James Mattis reportedly was consulted on the decision, but it’s hard to know what form that consultation took, particularly since Mattis is currently on vacation this week.

Just three weeks ago, Mattis announced that he was giving military commanders another six months to review whether allowing transgender people to enlist would impact military readiness. (Transgender troops already serving were not affected by the review.) If Trump were actually making this decision in consultation with “my generals,” as he claimed this morning, why wouldn’t he wait until December when that review will be complete?

Instead of attacking my sources and lazily hiding under your 'fake news' blanket, why not simply post factual information that proves the opposite? That:

1. Trump indeed consulted with top military brass
2. Mattis and others military leaders pushed for this ban and are on board with it
 
Sigh, why do I always have to put in the work? Facts and truth aren't that difficult to ascertain, just need to look around a little.

US Joint Chiefs blindsided by Trump's transgender ban
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/07/27/politics/trump-military-transgender-ban-joint-chiefs/index.html



Defense chiefs resist Donald Trump's ban on transgender troops
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...p-transgender-ban-troops-pentagon-us-military





Mattis was on vacation when Trump tweeted transgender ban, and he was reportedly 'appalled' by it
http://www.businessinsider.com/mattis-vacation-appaulled-trump-trans-ban-2017-7



The Military Is Officially Ignoring Trump’s Transgender Order
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/07/joint-chiefs-transgender-ban-military



Trump ban on transgender service members alarms some military officers
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-military-transgender-exclusive-idUSKBN1AC2FN




Why Didn’t Trump Warn the Pentagon About His Transgender Ban?
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slat...n_the_pentagon_about_his_transgender_ban.html



Instead of attacking my sources and lazily hiding under your 'fake news' blanket, why not simply post factual information that proves the opposite? That:

1. Trump indeed consulted with top military brass
2. Mattis and others military leaders pushed for this ban and are on board with it

You still don't get it? Factual information? From your articles you just posted! Let me repeat - "SOURCES SAY"

three US defense officials told CNN

a US official said. The official was not authorized to discuss the matter and so spoke on condition of anonymity.

Sources close to Mattis ...

Mattis was reportedly given very little notice

one said by telephone, speaking on the condition of anonymity.

As much bullshit as your Leftists rags have thrown around in 7 months, as much fake news that has been busted propped up by "SOURCES SAY," pardon us if we take your "sources" with a **** ton of doubt included.
 
Last edited:
Top