Poll

Will Trump get re-elected in 2020?

Yes
No

Author Topic: POLITICS & DONALD Annoying Orange MEGATHREAD  (Read 2216472 times)

any combat role or any role, period? for combat roles i can understand why it might be an issue, but can ol man richard down the street with arthritis still work in IT even though he has to take his 800mg of naproxen every few hours?
someone working for IT doesnt plan out military training, teach people how to kill other people and avoid getting shot, nor do they plan out ways to resolve major conflicts and send out units to go and shoot people/possibly get shot

war is probably the most traumatizing thing that can happen to a person. look at the rates of ptsd and Self Delete in vets, it's loving insane. there are hundreds of stories of guys breaking down after a fight. now stick a group with a mental illness that comes with a 40% Self Delete rate out in the field and see what happens

I mean I hate transmissions. Which is why I think they should have mandatory conscription and be on the frontlines.

Say when do we get to invade North Korea again?

war is probably the most traumatizing thing that can happen to a person. look at the rates of ptsd and Self Delete in vets, it's loving insane. there are hundreds of stories of guys breaking down after a fight. now stick a group with a mental illness that comes with a 40% Self Delete rate out in the field and see what happens
or you could stick them in the 80% of military roles that aren't in combat

Someone who needs constant medication is not suitable for any role in the military, full stop

I'm not sure how that contradicts my post, if they aren't suitable for their role, they aren't suitable for their role. I'm fixing to leave that up to the military's discretion, since they know what they need more than me, you or Annoying Orange.

IT is absolutely military, along with contractors, managers, secretaries, etc. the military isn't at all exclusive to people fighting in iran, or people training recruits

You've done the same thing multiple times. You always try force memeing that the right gets offended like SJWs. Funny how that never works out for you though.

Idk man, seems like you've got pretty thin skin

I'm not sure how that contradicts my post, if they aren't suitable for their role, they aren't suitable for their role. I'm fixing to leave that up to the military's discretion, since they know what they need more than me, you or Annoying Orange.

Your post was exactly what people were saying as a counter point to banning transgenders from the military so I just assumed that's what you meant, sorry if that's not the case

Idk man, seems like you've got pretty thin skin

And it seems like you've got a pretty thick skull considering how much you've attempted to meme this.

leisure is a handicap don't bother him too much

That's IT, not the military
The military hasn't allowed diabetics or anyone else with chronic illnesses to enlist in any branch for a reason, I don't see why we should make exceptions for someone who can just wait and have their issue sorted out once they stop taking their meds anyway.
someone working for IT doesnt plan out military training, teach people how to kill other people and avoid getting shot, nor do they plan out ways to resolve major conflicts and send out units to go and shoot people/possibly get shot
right i was asking because i understand the differences, but the use of the language "any role" is confusing since not all military-related jobs are combat-oriented. i assumed that we were talking exclusively about combat roles but the clarification was necessary because that was part of the issue with Annoying Orange's tweets

Your post was exactly what people were saying as a counter point to banning transgenders from the military so I just assumed that's what you meant, sorry if that's not the case

I'm just opposed to any blanket bans on who can enlist in the military, since basic training / bootcamp already effectively weeds out applicants who aren't suitable for their role.  It's not really reasonable to want anything more than what we already have.

Here is a long list of jobs in the US Army. It includes things like translators, cryptologists, military band/orchaestras, HR, doctors, engineers, scientists, construction, and office jobs. There are tons of trans people already in these jobs. Is it right to take them out? Or decide that new people can't have these jobs that are completely non-combat-related?

Here is a long list of jobs in the US Army. It includes things like translators, cryptologists, military band/orchaestras, HR, doctors, engineers, scientists, construction, and office jobs. There are tons of trans people already in these jobs. Is it right to take them out? Or decide that new people can't have these jobs that are completely non-combat-related?
Of course not, but the ban is 100% about spite against transgender people. There is no evidence-based reasoning behind it. It's Annoying Orange doing something that he knows will make his core supporters like him more.

Even if you assume that being transgender is a mental illness (which goes against the bulk of scientific evidence plus the DSM-IV), then you're still saying we shouldn't support the health of people who are literally risking their lives for our country. Which begs the question of why conservatives always want to stuff all over progressive social reforms for not first 'helping the troops', when they're more than happy to turn around and kick our soldiers in the teeth just for being gender non-conforming. Talk about 'Murrica, right?

And it seems like you've got a pretty thick skull considering how much you've attempted to meme this.

You remind me of /pol/ on 4Chan and that's not a positive saying.