Unfit Troops Deployed and Still the Law Denies LGBT to Serve

It was recently reported by USA Today that since 2003 43,000 troops have been deployed in support of operations in both Afghanistan and Iraq despite the fact that they were deemed medically unfit to deploy. Although the number of unfit troops deployed has fluctuated since 2003, there was a significant increase in 2007 with 9,140 unfit troops deployed. However, the USA Today article notes that “some reasons included a need for eyeglasses, dental work or allergy medicine and a small number of mental health cases”.

The article further reports that “In testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee in February, the panel’s chairman, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., asked Army leaders about an e-mail from the surgeon for the Fort Carson brigade that said medically “borderline” soldiers went to war because “we have been having issues reaching deployable strength.” (The Army Times)

Why does the United States military deploy troops into high stress, combat situations without having their health concerns (however minor) addressed?

Is this further evidence that the branches of the military are still struggling to recruit enough volunteers to serve? Shouldn’t even a small number of troops being deployed with mental health issues be a concern to commanders?

The U.S. has deployed over 1.6 million troops since 2003 with approximately 158,000 troops currently deployed. During this time we have witnessed the effects of stop-loss which is associated with Title 10, United States Code, Section 12305(a) and essentially states that "the President may suspend any provision of law relating to promotion, retirement, or separation applicable to any member of the armed forces who the President determines is essential to the national security of the United States”. Why does the military have to resort to what amounts to be a back-door draft?

We have seen the stress on our troops and their families with repeated deployments to combat zones without adequate time at home. Our troops need to have enough time in the safety of the homeland in order to recover from the trauma of combat, heal wounds, and spend time with their families before being deployed again and a again.

Finally, the Army (which makes up the bulk of the U.S. led forces in both Iraq and Afghanistan) continues to struggle with recruiting youth. “In spite of efforts by the Pentagon to aggressively recruit youth into the Army, the Army missed its benchmarks once again in 2007.” (National Priorities). The Army has repeatedly lowered its recruiting standards – education, criminal background, etc. – in order to bolster its recruiting goals. Is this how a modern force should operate? Should we not be recruiting the best and brightest into a modern army?

Despite the deployment of unfit troops, repeated deployments of over-stressed troops, and an Army that is unable to meet its recruiting goals - the U.S. military continues to discharge otherwise fit troops and denies many more the opportunity to enlist with dignity because of their sexual orientation.

According to Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN), the number of service-members who have been discharged since 2001 has decreased to about half in 2006. Prior to the deployment of troops to Afghanistan and Iraq the number of troops discharge under the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) law was at its highest (1273). As is true in past conflicts, when there is a need for troops to serve in combat, the number of discharges based on an individual’s sexual orientation declines. In 2006, the most recent data, there were 612 soldiers discharge (SLDN). SLDN estimates that the pentagon fires two gay people every day (SLDN).

According to SLDN 2006 “Freedom to Serve” report, here are some other facts to note regarding the DATA law and how it impacts the United States military readiness:

Since 1994, the Pentagon has discharged more than 10,000 service members.

There is no other law in the United States that mandates an employer to firer someone for being lesbian, gay or bisexual.

Military readiness is best served by recruiting and retaining the best and brightest young Americans into military service; DADT hurts military readiness by disqualify thousands of talented and patriotic Americans from military service.

The military has discharged at least 55 Arabic linguists and 9 Farsi linguists under DADT in the last 5 years. Discharging linguist because they are gay hurts military readiness. In 2002 the Government Accountability Office reported a 50% shortfall in new linguist recruits. The GAO also reports that DADT has forced the Pentagon to discharge nearly 800 vital personnel critical to national security, including linguist and military intelligence analyst.

In Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom, allied forces from many countries allow gays to serve openly, and those troops serve side by side with American service members.

Between 63% and 79% of Americans pooled by Gallup agree that openly gay or lesbian Americans should be allowed to serve in the military.

In a time of national crisis, instead of deploying unfit troops, resorting to stop loss, and lowing recruiting standards we should be looking at ways to include all Americans who are willing to volunteer to be put in harm’s way. We need to speak out against the DADT law – the only law in the country that institutionalizes discrimination based solely on a person’s sexual orientation. In 2005 Congressman Meehan of Massachusetts introduced HR 1059 – the Military Readiness Act to in part repeal the DADT law.

Being gay never interfered with my ability to do my job. I would love to continue my service to my country, but only with integrity, honor and pride.