Pentagon Discharged Hundreds Of Service Members Under 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' In Fiscal 2010: Report

WASHINGTON -- The Pentagon discharged some 250 service members under the soon-to-be-defunct “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy in fiscal year 2010, according to numbers released Thursday by a group of gay troops and veterans, even though top brass ordered commanders to effectively stop enforcing the ban on openly gay troops during that time.

A total of 261 service members, including 11 in the Coast Guard -- which falls under the authority of the Department of Homeland Security -- were tossed out in fiscal 2010, a tally by Servicemembers United found. The group said it based its numbers on internal Defense Department statistics that are not routinely released publicly.

The discharges last year represented an all-time annual low since the policy began in 1994. More than 14,000 troops -- or 14,316 including National Guard, according to the group’s unofficial count -- have been discharged under the policy.

President Barack Obama signed DADT’s repeal into law in December, but the policy remains in effect until he, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, certify that that the Defense Department is ready to implement the change without hurting military readiness or effectiveness. That won’t happen until all the troops have undergone training that is already underway.

But halfway through the fiscal year, long before DADT got the official thumbs-down from Congress, Gates changed the way the policy was implemented. The idea was to make it harder to toss out gay service members who were otherwise doing their job, in part by leaving decisions about discharges to generals or admirals high up in the chain of command.

Yet despite the loosening of restrictions, the equivalent of two Army companies were given their walking papers.

"While this latest official discharge number represents an all-time annual low, it is still unusually high,” Servicemembers United's executive director, Alexander Nicholson, said. "Despite this law clearly being on its death bed at the time, 261 more careers were terminated and 261 more lives were abruptly turned upside down because of this policy."

Comments

[The Mad Guesser]

01:13 PM on 03/26/2011

Now I'm really confused. If the enemy slaughters our infantry platoons because Gay soldiers are distracted by their sexual appetite for their comrades, then why haven't Republicans passed laws banning girlie magazines in foxholes, or, in the alternative, design rifles they can shoot with one hand? Aren't straight soldiers even more dangerous?

[KenClay]

08:39 AM on 03/26/2011

SHAME SHAME SHAME

[KenClay]

06:10 PM on 03/25/2011

republicants don't believe in Love...... Party of Hate!

[hairydodger]

11:49 AM on 03/25/2011

Somebody asked and somebody told. Or, YAWN squared. Clear this up and get over it. How about a gay platoon or a gay company? Crap, probably would be sexual discrimination.

[gman87]

11:01 AM on 03/25/2011

Yawn...zzzzzzzzzzzz

[Bill J4321]

03:34 PM on 03/25/2011

finally!

go to sleep little boy.

FOREVER!

[Cacey]

07:41 AM on 03/25/2011

These discharges are a huge waste of tax payer dollars not to mention a detrement to our national security.

[Eric Leslie]

07:22 AM on 03/25/2011

DADT training today at work. so since were getting training today, the ban may end in june or july.

[kkehoe5]

07:15 AM on 03/25/2011

DADT = Mind your business, you can't ask me and I can't tell you. It was the law of the land and those 261 service members knew that when they enlisted.

It is the duty of any court even military to uphold the laws, even if they don't agree with them. The law may have been on it's last leg before it was overturned, but it was still the law at the time of their discharge. I don't understand why eveyone is so shocked by this.

[Cacey]

07:40 AM on 03/25/2011

See my post to Matthew below. 

[AnotherTry]

07:51 AM on 03/25/2011

Because discrimination violates the constitution. Unless ALL service members must keep mum about who they love, none should have to. Just because something is a law doesn't mean it is right.

[Matthew Christopher]

07:05 AM on 03/25/2011

Unless they joined in the last year they joined the military knowing fully well that DADT existed and chose to join anyway. This is the same as cadets who in their senior year at a military academy all of a sudden figure out they don't like fighting people. All the cases were most likely started long before DADT was repealed, this is just the tail end of the policy.

[Cacey]

07:40 AM on 03/25/2011

Neither you nor Kkehoe5 understand the complexity of human sexuality or of maturing sexuality.  While all of us are assumed (a very dangerous word) to be hetrosexual at birth and are raised to be hetrosexual some people are not and come to the realization at varing ages and under varying circumstances.  I cannot tell you how many people of both sexes I know who married and raised children before coming to the realization that their true sexuality was homosexualtiy.  At the same time I can tell you of a neighbor of a few years ago, a high school jock with many "notches in his belt" who joined the Navy and became a SEAL and only then realized that sexuality was much more than physical and those his hetrosexual activities has been pleasurable they lacked the emotional satisfaction that his homosexual actions provided.

[kkehoe5]

08:03 AM on 03/25/2011

Still don't address the point that it was the law of the land from when they enlisted until they were discharged. I don't think it is right to discharge gays either, but it is the law and the courts have to enforce the laws regardless if 99% of the population disagrees or not.

[AnotherTry]

07:52 AM on 03/25/2011

The law was unconstitutional the day it was enacted. Your analogy FAILS.

[elizlucinda]

06:35 AM on 03/25/2011

If they were discharged for being Gay, then re-instate them now with full back pay

[elijah24]

08:04 AM on 03/25/2011

And rank, including promotion, if their peers have been promoted ahead of them in their absence.

[Dunkleberger Karl]

04:13 AM on 03/25/2011

Nothing says "evangelical in the military and manditory attendence @ religious events like
 
the enforcement of DADT in 2010.. Hurry up and get rid of the gay seemed to be the standard of some commands!
 
when I say some I mean in virginia and in washington state!

[Big Country]

02:52 AM on 03/25/2011

This article fails to state how many wanted to get discharged from the military. It would have you beleive those that were dishcharged did not want to be. Fail!

[AnotherTry]

07:53 AM on 03/25/2011

And you fail to offer any evidence to what you say here. FAIL.

[Dunkleberger Karl]

08:19 AM on 03/25/2011

You talk like a drill I had and he was a big FAIL!

[Jeffrey Budd]

02:50 AM on 03/25/2011

The reason Gays were not allowed in the Military was because they were considered a security risk. Back in the day when most were still hiding the fact about their sexuality the brass felt that they could be compromised and then blackmailed by the enemy. Not saying it was right or wrong buy that is part of it. In fact the Russians did blackmail high ranking people and did go that route by threatening them with exposure about their homosexuality. in todays society we all see that is no longer a problem because most people don't care. Think what is was like to be gay back in the 30's or 40's when no one came out. So that was partly why Gays weren't allowed to serve. Not saying it was right or wrong so don't jump down my back.

[Dunkleberger Karl]

04:15 AM on 03/25/2011

Not one gay person in the military convicted of spying , and of being black mailed because they were gay! never happened!
 
although several goverment peaple were black mailed , but they were solviets!

[usmcflir]

08:21 AM on 03/25/2011

Just because we do not know about it does not mean that it did not happen. Remember Senator McCarthy? Everyone called him paranoid because of all his anti-communist hysteria but after the collapse of the Soviet Union many Soviet archives were opened up and showed that they did have an extensive spy network throughout the United States just like Senator McCarthy said there was.

[Whitemellon]

05:16 AM on 03/25/2011

Then what about gay politicians ?

[Dunkleberger Karl]

08:20 AM on 03/25/2011

Most of them thAt had a brain came out long befor it was fashionable!
 
Better to get a head of a rumor than be the victim of a lie!

[usmcflir]

08:21 AM on 03/25/2011

They are voted into office and get a clearance automatically even if they would not be able to get one otherwise.

[Gus Adaire]

01:36 AM on 03/25/2011

Good...

That was the whole point.

[AdamWest1313]

02:51 AM on 03/25/2011

Good? There is no logical reason to keep homosexuals out.

[enhancedvibes]

09:02 AM on 03/25/2011

Actually Clinton signed DADT believing this would protect gay service members. However, once implemented it was used by some to "out" women for not accepting sexual advances or out men who didnt tow the line.

[Emily Jane Bernstein]

12:30 AM on 03/25/2011

If we keep kicking out valuable persons in the military and we keep going to war, whose gonna fight....the elite better change their tune and keep willing soldiers ready to fight in the service, before they all decide they don't want to fight in all these wars.

We need to get out of the soldiers bedrooms as the ones making all these decisions have some pretty bad hangups themselves, they need to look in the mirror and start running the country and stay out of everybody's life.

[usmcflir]

08:23 AM on 03/25/2011

Not all that were discharged under the DADT policy were willing soldiers. Some used the DADT policy as an excuse to get discharged after they realized the military was not for them after they went to bootcamp.