PDA

View Full Version : John McCain: Women should avoid military service until sexual misconduct crisis solve



CrustySMSgt
06-05-2013, 06:37 AM
(http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/04/18729878-john-mccain-women-should-avoid-military-service-until-sexual-misconduct-crisis-solved?lite)

OK, while I don't agree with McCain's position, I do agree something needs to be done.

There are many examples of why the ability of military commanders to fix this is in question. Conviction rates and sentences between military and civilian sexual assaults show huge dipsarities. As pointed out by one of the folks on the panel the service chiefs met today, "How good a fighter pilot a perpetrator is should have no bearing on their sentence for committing a sexual assault."

A great parallel was made on a news program I saw... look how (un)successful the Catholic Church was at resolving their sexual abuse challenges when left to handling it internally. It was only after the lights were turned on and the practice of sweeping it under the rug and moving preists to other locations to offend again (Wilkerson?) came to a halt that they began to overcome the issue.

Another comment from a victim caught my attention was, Having the victim report being assaulted by a fellow service member to your commander is like being raped by your brother and having your parents make the call on prosecuting the family member." (not her exact words, best I could remember, as I heard it before my morning coffee lol).

I'm all for commanders having the authority to command, but I think they are missing the mark when it comes to this issue. Their position that they need to retain authority in these cases "because the UCMJ applies around the world where US laws don't" doesn't wash. There are JAGs in all those same places and the military justice system is capable of dealing with this as with any other crime.

Until a victim can be reasonably assured they'll be heard, a proper investigation will be completed (without undue command influence steering the outcome and an environment that doesn't immediately blame the victim and side with the perpetrator) we aren't going to make headway on this issue.

As far as how to fix the root of the problem, stopping the assaults from being committed... much tougher issue. What makes someone think they have cause to commit such an act against another person? You can't powerpoint/CBT/wingman day that out of someone. I do think bystander intervention training goes a little way to empowering those on the sidelines to get involved when they see something going down.

I'll acknowledging false reports are made. The pendulum should not swing to taking a gospel the word of the victim to the detriment of the investigative and judicial process. One should be assumed innocent until proven guilty. But when found guilty, justice should be swift and painful (same applies to filers of false reports!).

I watched my daughter graduate Air Force basic training a few weeks back. I think McCain's comments are a sensationalistic attempt to get himself in the headlines and trust that my daughter is in good hands with most commanders... but there are too many out there whose misplaced alleigances give those who would commit these vile acts the confidence to prey on vulnerable women (and yes some men) and not fear the consequences and that needs to stop.

Rainmaker
06-05-2013, 03:25 PM
This is great advice from the Senator. The military might actually be able to get back to worrying about fighting and winning wars instead of being a social experiment in political correctness

garhkal
06-05-2013, 09:33 PM
I do feel something needs to change. BUT if we are going to go the route of prosecutors vice commanders doing it, i HOPE that they also change the "we don't charge false accusations, cause we don't want to scare people away" crap.

Banned
06-06-2013, 07:05 AM
Hey, what do you expect? This is the same asshole who opposed the post-911 GI Bill.

Sorry dude, we can't all divorce our wives and marry wealthy ones when we return from deployment.

TJMAC77SP
06-06-2013, 10:45 AM
Hey, what do you expect? This is the same asshole who opposed the post-911 GI Bill.

Sorry dude, we can't all divorce our wives and marry wealthy ones when we return from deployment.

Do you know WHY he opposed the bill?

imported_WILDJOKER5
06-06-2013, 12:52 PM
Wonder if he gives the same advice to men since that is who most of the sexual assaults in the military are against?

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/majority-sexual-assaults-rapes-committed-military-2011-men-article-1.1150235

Banned
06-06-2013, 05:07 PM
Do you know WHY he opposed the bill?

He didn't want incentives for Soldiers to leave the military and live normal lives... he would prefer they stay in and continue be bullet catchers.

Measure Man
06-06-2013, 05:13 PM
Wonder if he gives the same advice to men since that is who most of the sexual assaults in the military are against?

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/majority-sexual-assaults-rapes-committed-military-2011-men-article-1.1150235

I know what it says...but, I still find it hard to believe.

Banned
06-06-2013, 05:19 PM
I know what it says...but, I still find it hard to believe.

I believe it... I think as an individual, female service members are far more likely to be assaulted - however I would bet the overwhelming majority of assaults are male on male, simply because the vast majority of members are male.

TJMAC77SP
06-06-2013, 05:46 PM
He didn't want incentives for Soldiers to leave the military and live normal lives... he would prefer they stay in and continue be bullet catchers.

Wrong. Nice sound bite but wrong.

Rhetoric aside what was the real reason he opposed the bill ?

Banned
06-06-2013, 05:56 PM
Wrong. Nice sound bite but wrong.

Rhetoric aside what was the real reason he opposed the bill ?

Exactly that... he feared it would cause more members to "get out of the service." (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=4652517&page=1)

In other words - you're a valued asset as long as you're fighting the war... once you get out you're worthless.

TJMAC77SP
06-06-2013, 06:14 PM
Exactly that... he feared it would cause more members to "get out of the service." (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=4652517&page=1)

In other words - you're a valued asset as long as you're fighting the war... once you get out you're worthless.

Right, that is exactly what he meant because retention means zero to the effectiveness of the military.....................


I asked but didn't expect the rhetoric to be set aside.

Banned
06-06-2013, 06:27 PM
Right, that is exactly what he meant because retention means zero to the effectiveness of the military.....................


I asked but didn't expect the rhetoric to be set aside.

Easy for him to say when he dumped his disabled wife and married money. Not all veterans can do that.

Greg
06-06-2013, 06:30 PM
Exactly that... he feared it would cause more members to "get out of the service." (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=4652517&page=1)

In other words - you're a valued asset as long as you're fighting the war... once you get out you're worthless.

Nowhere in the article does it state that the bills benefits overlap benefits already given to those about to separate. This bill would have brought excessive red tape, causing delays.

But it was abcNEWS.

TJMAC77SP
06-06-2013, 07:03 PM
Easy for him to say when he dumped his disabled wife and married money. Not all veterans can do that.

I have heard this lame and oversimplified critique of his divorce and remarriage over and over again. It reeks of desperation where nothing else is available.

These same people and that includes you Joe will scoff at criticizing Clinton ("It's just sex", "It is between him and his wife", etc) for his blatant disregard for the same marriage vows McCain is being castigated for supposedly flaunting. This is hypocrisy at its worst to even a casual reader of these forums. Blow jobs in the Oval Office vs. a legal divorce.

I for one have no insight into McCain’s marital situation and as someone who has been divorced twice I am hesitant to condemn anyone for merely divorcing without KNOWING all the facts. I do KNOW that McCain has said this about the divorce…"My marriage's collapse was attributable to my own selfishness and immaturity. The blame was entirely mine."

Notice he didn’t try to define the word ‘is’ or any other mincing. It seems pretty cut and dry to me.

If someone indeed wants to condemn McCain for the character of his divorce and the actions that led up to it that is of course their right but it seems a moral imperative or at least for the sake of integrity and credibility to hold others in public office to the same standards. As to the opinion of others about McCain, I think it speaks volumes that his ex-wife whom everyone like to hold up as the cast-aside spouse has a close relationship with her ex-husband and even contributed to his campaign.

Measure Man
06-06-2013, 07:10 PM
What.. That men can be raped?

Uh....no. I find it hard to believe there are more men sexually assaulted than women...in the military.

Measure Man
06-06-2013, 07:10 PM
What.. That men can be raped?

Uh....no. I find it hard to believe there are more men sexually assaulted than women...in the military.

garhkal
06-06-2013, 07:15 PM
I know what it says...but, I still find it hard to believe.

What.. That men can be raped?

Banned
06-06-2013, 07:57 PM
I have heard this lame and oversimplified critique of his divorce and remarriage over and over again. It reeks of desperation where nothing else is available.

These same people and that includes you Joe will scoff at criticizing Clinton ("It's just sex", "It is between him and his wife", etc) for his blatant disregard for the same marriage vows McCain is being castigated for supposedly flaunting. This is hypocrisy at its worst to even a casual reader of these forums. Blow jobs in the Oval Office vs. a legal divorce.

I for one have no insight into McCain’s marital situation and as someone who has been divorced twice I am hesitant to condemn anyone for merely divorcing without KNOWING all the facts. I do KNOW that McCain has said this about the divorce…"My marriage's collapse was attributable to my own selfishness and immaturity. The blame was entirely mine."

Notice he didn’t try to define the word ‘is’ or any other mincing. It seems pretty cut and dry to me.

If someone indeed wants to condemn McCain for the character of his divorce and the actions that led up to it that is of course their right but it seems a moral imperative or at least for the sake of integrity and credibility to hold others in public office to the same standards. As to the opinion of others about McCain, I think it speaks volumes that his ex-wife whom everyone like to hold up as the cast-aside spouse has a close relationship with her ex-husband and even contributed to his campaign.

I question McCain's credibility, both as a "family values" candidate, and his credibility when it comes to the well-being of vets.

Just as I would question Clinton if he opened his trap about extra-marital affairs at work... but to my knowledge he hasn't.

TJMAC77SP
06-07-2013, 10:43 AM
I question McCain's credibility, both as a "family values" candidate, and his credibility when it comes to the well-being of vets.

Just as I would question Clinton if he opened his trap about extra-marital affairs at work... but to my knowledge he hasn't.

Right, your position on McCain is completely and only related to your heartfelt opinion of the details of his divorce over 30 years ago. Ok, thanks for sharing.

EDIT: To correct your knowledge..........""I want an America where family values live in our actions, not just in our speeches." Presidential Nomination Acceptance Speech of then Governor Clinton, Democratic National Convention - July 1992

"You live in a country that makes it harder to raise children than any other country in the world. You vote for me and I'll give you family values.” Candidate Clinton

Banned
06-07-2013, 09:16 PM
Right, your position on McCain is completely and only related to your heartfelt opinion of the details of his divorce over 30 years ago. Ok, thanks for sharing.

His military service happened over 30 years ago too, yes? So why is one acceptable to bring up, but not the other?


EDIT: To correct your knowledge..........""I want an America where family values live in our actions, not just in our speeches." Presidential Nomination Acceptance Speech of then Governor Clinton, Democratic National Convention - July 1992

"You live in a country that makes it harder to raise children than any other country in the world. You vote for me and I'll give you family values.” Candidate Clinton

Good to know, and probably shoudn't be surprising. So does Clinton having a double standard make it okay for McCain to have a double standard?

wildman
06-08-2013, 01:41 AM
Call me old fashion hell call me a sexists but when we integrated the sexes in the armed forces we opened Pandora's box IMO. We now reap the harvest of what we sowed. I still remember the W.A.F.S. and the separate squadrons. When you put together men and women who are barley out of puberty what the hell do you expect? Now add in some idiot on a power trip who has authority over these kids and the potential for this sort of thing is diffidently there. Also add in the lack of a moral compass that appears to be prevalent in today's society and you have yet more potential. Add in a commander who does not want to have to deal with any of this and you get what you are seeing. A no tolerance policy needs to be implemented and strictly enforced. Sexual contact between members not married to each other is against the UCMJ needs to be a new law, that perhaps would curb this. Oh I can see some of you screaming no already.

Always,
Wildman

CrustySMSgt
06-08-2013, 04:54 AM
Call me old fashion hell call me a sexists but when we integrated the sexes in the armed forces we opened Pandora's box IMO. We now reap the harvest of what we sowed. I still remember the W.A.F.S. and the separate squadrons. When you put together men and women who are barley out of puberty what the hell do you expect? Now add in some idiot on a power trip who has authority over these kids and the potential for this sort of thing is diffidently there. Also add in the lack of a moral compass that appears to be prevalent in today's society and you have yet more potential. Add in a commander who does not want to have to deal with any of this and you get what you are seeing. A no tolerance policy needs to be implemented and strictly enforced. Sexual contact between members not married to each other is against the UCMJ needs to be a new law, that perhaps would curb this. Oh I can see some of you screaming no already.

Always,
Wildman

You missed the part about letting them black folk in our units too. :fish :wtf2:

Where's the 1850s when you need them. :noidea :loco

wildman
06-08-2013, 06:04 PM
You missed the part about letting them black folk in our units too. :fish :wtf2:

Where's the 1850s when you need them. :noidea :loco

Yup sure did but I think the civil war may have seen a few in the Union Army. Don't know if they had any women however and if perchance they did I wonder if they were being sexually assaulted by their fellow blacks.

Always.
Wildman

Absinthe Anecdote
06-08-2013, 06:30 PM
Yup sure did but I think the civil war may have seen a few in the Union Army. Don't know if they had any women however and if perchance they did I wonder if they were being sexually assaulted by their fellow blacks.

Always.
Wildman

That isn’t a very nice thing to say and it reminds me of something an al-Qa'ida sympathizer would say.

I think you should do the honorable thing and report yourself to a tip line.

wildman
06-08-2013, 07:05 PM
That isn’t a very nice thing to say and it reminds me of something an al-Qa'ida sympathizer would say.

I think you should do the honorable thing and report yourself to a tip line.

Idiocy runs supreme and you appear to be a charter member! Have a nice day!

Always,
Wildman

Rainmaker
06-12-2013, 08:20 PM
Call me old fashion hell call me a sexists but when we integrated the sexes in the armed forces we opened Pandora's box IMO. We now reap the harvest of what we sowed. I still remember the W.A.F.S. and the separate squadrons. When you put together men and women who are barley out of puberty what the hell do you expect? Now add in some idiot on a power trip who has authority over these kids and the potential for this sort of thing is diffidently there. Also add in the lack of a moral compass that appears to be prevalent in today's society and you have yet more potential. Add in a commander who does not want to have to deal with any of this and you get what you are seeing. A no tolerance policy needs to be implemented and strictly enforced. Sexual contact between members not married to each other is against the UCMJ needs to be a new law, that perhaps would curb this. Oh I can see some of you screaming no already.

Always,
Wildman

Pandora opened her own box.

TJMAC77SP
06-12-2013, 08:25 PM
His military service happened over 30 years ago too, yes? So why is one acceptable to bring up, but not the other?



Good to know, and probably shoudn't be surprising. So does Clinton having a double standard make it okay for McCain to have a double standard?

I am not speaking of McCain or Clinton's standards. I am speaking of people who excuse Clinton's behavior as private, not related to the Presidency, etc while holding McCain to a standard they are not willing to hold Clinton to.

Banned
06-12-2013, 08:51 PM
I am not speaking of McCain or Clinton's standards. I am speaking of people who excuse Clinton's behavior as private, not related to the Presidency, etc while holding McCain to a standard they are not willing to hold Clinton to.

If a candidate wishes to force certain values into our legal system - then yes, absolutely, his own adherence to those values should be brought into review.

RobotChicken
06-13-2013, 07:35 AM
"As should yours!" 'RRC'.

TJMAC77SP
06-13-2013, 10:42 AM
If a candidate wishes to force certain values into our legal system - then yes, absolutely, his own adherence to those values should be brought into review.

Huh? What values did McCain try to force into our legal system and did you not think this was a very transparent attempt to deflect the actual point?

grimreaper
06-13-2013, 11:29 PM
Hey, what do you expect? This is the same asshole who opposed the post-911 GI Bill.

Sorry dude, we can't all divorce our wives and marry wealthy ones when we return from deployment.

As usual, Joe is talking out his ass. Joe won't tell you the real reason why McCain opposed the first version on the post 9/11 GI Bill even though he seems very good at Googling links...links that support his accusations anyway. Funny how he wasn't able to find this one though:


ABC News’ Z. Byron Wolf reports: Sen. John McCain did not vote last month when Senators passed their version of a war funding emergency supplemental. But he said the bill being considered then was overloaded with funding for non-war related projects and he objected to a sweeping new benefit for veterans to get the equivalent of state college tuition and a living stipend after only a few years service because he worried it would affect military retention rates.

But, with the addition of a clause allowing service members to transfer their benefits to family members, McCain now supports the 21st Century Bill of Rights, the proposal to give substantially more benefits to veterans for college after their service in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. And he’ll support a deal between the White House and House Democrats to fund the war along with $21 billion in domestic spending.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2008/06/mccain-now-supp/

McCain wanted the transferrability option and it was not included in the first one. Fact: John McCain voted for the Post 9/11 GI Bill that we now have. Joe's statement above is undeniably FALSE.

P.S. I can't stand John McCain.

Banned
06-14-2013, 01:05 AM
As usual, Joe is talking out his ass. Joe won't tell you the real reason why McCain opposed the first version on the post 9/11 GI Bill even though he seems very good at Googling links...links that support his accusations anyway. Funny how he wasn't able to find this one though:

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2008/06/mccain-now-supp/

McCain wanted the transferrability option and it was not included in the first one. Fact: John McCain voted for the Post 9/11 GI Bill that we now have. Joe's statement above is undeniably FALSE.


Its good to get an update from grimreaper fantasy land.

So the fact that McCain eventually backed down under public pressure - DURING his run for the presidency no less - that's somehow proof that he had opposed the original 9/11 GI Bill because he feared too many meat shields would leave the military for a normal life?

Oh and I also love how YOUR OWN quote contradicts your statement:

he objected to a sweeping new benefit for veterans to get the equivalent of state college tuition and a living stipend after only a few years service because he worried it would affect military retention rates.


P.S. I can't stand John McCain.

But you love to argue with Joe B every chance you can, whether or not we even actually disagree.

grimreaper
06-14-2013, 01:06 AM
Its good to get an update from grimreaper fantasy land.

So the fact that McCain eventually backed down under public pressure - DURING his run for the presidency no less - that's somehow proof that he had opposed the original 9/11 GI Bill because he feared too many meat shields would leave the military for a normal life?

Oh and I also love how YOUR OWN quote contradicts your statement:

he objected to a sweeping new benefit for veterans to get the equivalent of state college tuition and a living stipend after only a few years service because he worried it would affect military retention rates.



But you love to argue with Joe B every chance you can, whether or not we even actually disagree.


You were wrong Joe. Just admit it and we'll move on.

Banned
06-14-2013, 01:09 AM
You were wrong Joe. Just admit it and we'll move on.

So we're two posts into this... and you've already abandoned all pretense of actually trying to present a viable argument... just now resorting to repetition, eh?

Very nice. Next time try typing YOU'RE WRONG OMG in all caps. That might make you more convincing. :)

grimreaper
06-14-2013, 01:12 AM
So we're two posts into this... and you've already abandoned all pretense of actually trying to present a viable argument... just now resorting to repetition, eh?

Very nice. Next time try typing YOU'RE WRONG OMG in all caps. That might make you more convincing. :)

Q: Did John McCain support the GI Bill we now enjoy?

A: Yes

Q: Did John McCain vote against the GI Bill at any point?

A: No


As I said, you were wrong. Just admit it and we'll move on.

grimreaper
06-14-2013, 01:24 AM
Its good to get an update from grimreaper fantasy land.

So the fact that McCain eventually backed down under public pressure - DURING his run for the presidency no less - that's somehow proof that he had opposed the original 9/11 GI Bill because he feared too many meat shields would leave the military for a normal life?

Oh and I also love how YOUR OWN quote contradicts your statement:

he objected to a sweeping new benefit for veterans to get the equivalent of state college tuition and a living stipend after only a few years service because he worried it would affect military retention rates.


and P.S. Joe...if your going to make that claim that a quote contradicts something, I suggest you accurately use the quote instead of leaving out half of it.


Your "claimed" quote:


he objected to a sweeping new benefit for veterans to get the equivalent of state college tuition and a living stipend after only a few years service because he worried it would affect military retention rates.

The ACTUAL quote:


But he said the bill being considered then was overloaded with funding for non-war related projects and he objected to a sweeping new benefit for veterans to get the equivalent of state college tuition and a living stipend after only a few years service because he worried it would affect military retention rates.

Hmmm...notice the part you left out. Why is that? And anyone who knows John McCain knows he's a big anti-pork guy.

And then, the part that drives it home...


But, with the addition of a clause allowing service members to transfer their benefits to family members, McCain now supports the 21st Century Bill of Rights, the proposal to give substantially more benefits to veterans for college after their service in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Sorry Joe, but I was following the GI Bill news very closely back then and was really hoping for the GI Bill transferrabilty and when it was NOT included in the original Bill I was disappointed since I don't plan on using mine. It was nice to see that it WAS included in the final version thankfully, and in-part due to the insistance of McCain...and even though I'm thankful for his efforts on that, I still can't stand him the other 99% of the time.

See Joe, you seem to think you're on some average public forum where you're talking to a buch of civilians who don't know any different and you can spew your rhetoric unchallenged all day long. Unfortunately, here people are going to call you on your bullshit.

Banned
06-14-2013, 01:51 AM
All caps bro... all caps.

wildman
06-14-2013, 02:56 AM
Guess I'm not the only one to tell ya your full of it Joe. Oh by the way this is not the only subject that you don't know the difference between your mouth and your ass. How do I know this? Because you frequently speak out both. John McCain earned his position whether you like him or not. The same sure as hell can not be said about you.

Always,
Wildman

imported_Freethinker1
06-14-2013, 03:30 AM
Meh. Some homophilic group comes up with a list of words that run counter to its worldview and value set, and somehow it becomes "hate". That word is so overused and misused anymore that it no longer conveys any credible meaning.

If we lower the age of consent to 12 in this country and I oppose it, am I suddenly a "hater"?

Move along. Nothing but worn out "hate speech" propaganda to see in this article.