February 2, 2010
Updated
DADT, Rachel Maddow, Lt Dan Choi, Lt Col Fehrenbach, Sen McCain, Secy Gates, questioning, McCain clips
Admiral Mullen’s testimony at the DADT hearings.
Have to say it’s a tad odd to see men of this age – especially in uniform – saying the words: gays, lesbians, homosexuals.
Latest stats: 65K gays in the military and 69% of Americans say they have the right to serve.
2009: 428 discharges – 169 women, 259 men
Adm Mullen states the president is for it, he is for it, Secy Gates is for it, the Chiefs are for it, the American people are for it, gay soldiers are for it…BUT…they don’t want to make changes when we are actively fighting two wars…They want to get it right. They’re appointing a task force (of course) and they won’t have anything to recommend until it is done and ultimately it’s up to Congress. (Senator McCain is against the repeal.) Study will take a year.
Read between the lines: it’s not happening on barry’s watch.
CBSNewsOnline
Text follows.
[Hand-transcribed]
ADMIRAL MULLEN:
We understand perfectly the president’s desire to see the law repealed and we owe him our best military advice about the impact of such a repeal and the manner in which we would implement a change in policy. The Chiefs and I have not yet developed that advice, and would like to have the time to do so in the same thoughtful, deliberate fashion with which the president has made it clear he wants to proceed.
The review Secy Gates ordered will give them the time to do it – a year. Agrees with Secy Gates’ selection of Gen Ham and Mr Johnson.
Mr Chairman, speaking for myself, and myself only, it is my personal belief that allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly would be the right thing to do. No matter how I look at this issue, I cannot escape being troubled by the fact that we have in place a policy which forces young men and women to lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow citizens.
For me, personally, it comes down to integrity…theirs as individuals, and ours as an institution.
I also believe that the great young men and women of our military can and would accomodate such a change – I never underestimate their ability to adapt.
But I do not know this for a fact. Nor do I know for a fact how we would best make such a major policy change in a time of war.
Then he lists the posssible changes repealing DADT would mean and that it “is not an issue for the military leadership to decide.”
Lays the “blame” on Congress for DADT as written and they have to follow the law as written.
Then he says that after the review:
The American People may yet have a different view. You may have a different view. I think that’s important and it’s important to have that discussion.
He says folks on either side don’t believe there is anything to debate but there is and the most important people are the actual servicemembers and their families who are already severely stressed.
Should the law change, we need to move forward in way that does not add to that stress.
Lists all the challenges, including the two wars and the economy and a “host of other significant security commitments around the globe”. [His emphasis]
While I believe this is an important issue, I also believe we need to be mindful, as we move forward, of other pressing needs in our military.
What our young men and women and their families want, what they deserve, is that we listen to them and act in their best interests.
What the citizens we defend want to know, what they deserve to know is that their uniformed leadership will act in a way that absolutely does not place in peril the readiness and effectiveness of their military.
I can tell you that I am 100% committed to that.
Balance, Mr Chairman, balance and thoughtfulness is what we need most right now. It’s what the president has promised us and it’s what we ask of you and this body.
