DADT was well defined at the beginning of the article. This quick punch of information was like jumping into a cold pool on a hot summer day, I was alert and ready for more.
He provided further information about the fact that it has "deprived the U.S. of nearly $200 million from its start until 2003." This shocking statistic supports his argument that the policy should be repealed due to the cost itself.
He further expresses his belief that the policy should be repealed by stating that DADT "discriminates against [LGBT] soldiers serving the military." The sentence following this statement lacks support, He reminds us that "our nation's history is scattered with discrimination..." If he mentioned a few examples regarding discrimination it would have supported his argument. It lacked concrete details, such as the beginning of militias and how Louisiana segregated theirs and etc.
The reference to Lt. Dan Choi in this post made the problem real. It supported Alex's argument that the policy is "senseless and just plain stupid." It makes no sense that the military would discharge an outstanding Lieutenant just because of his sexuality.
The question that should be asked is why aren't we as a whole fighting for their freedom? Soldiers are fighting for our freedom, so why can't they be freed from such discrimination? I agree that this policy should be repealed. There isn't a strong enough reasoning behind having such a policy.
This would have been a stronger argument if Alex included a reference backing up his beliefs. The Washington Post featured an article titled "Don't ask don't tell survey released," regarding this policy that would have taken his argument to a different level. The questions asked on the survey were enough to leave me pondering what idiot would take credit for writing such crap?
No comments:
Post a Comment