Sikh soldier completes basic training with Turban on .

[Bosshound]

Do you think they well let me wear a Sombrero if I want to Join ???

 

[afterhours]

Do you think they well let me wear a Sombrero if I want to Join ???

Don't know.....but feel free to enlist, then submit your request.

 

[DevilDawg1]

All branches of the military grant waivers for different things every day.

 

[Vonderbach]

I'm assuming he's an American citizen, so there would be no reason for him to put India ahead of America.

Not all Sikh's are Indians and not all Indians are Sikhs.

Do you believe American Citizens who have Italian heritage are are conflicted in that they might put Italy ahead of America?

cheers
ken

just hours after becoming an American citizen.

It's a reasonable question to ask of a recent immigrant. You should read the article before assuming me to be some sort of bigoted moron.

The bigotry in this thread is astounding. The whole "if you're not with us you're against us" mentality is apparently alive and well. People, like myself, often times have unpopular views because we might take time to actually read the article, digest the situation and come to a rationale conclusion. I suggest we stop with the ad hominem insults and stick to the facts, and if you require clarification, please ask.

 

[papi_ocho]

if the man wants to give up a potential lucrative career, to service his country. What is the problem.

so troops can hear all about how he's rich and gave up his potential lucrative career to serve.. so he should be received in a higher regard? NO I've lived this. with mid western boys that think because daddy got them their first corvette when they graduated bootcamp that the rest of the Marine Corps owes them a favor...

he followed the rules, applied for a religious accommodation.....according to army procedures, and was eventually given one.

if the army keeps allowing amendments to their policy and guidelines they are gonna have a zoo on their hands... and it's not gonna be pretty- bin laden wears a field jacket anyone ever seen it? imagine where he got it from....
the gentleman at foot hood didn't wear anything different. and look at where that got us.. even after multiple signs, he was ignored

the man followed the rules.....

if he was following the rules he would be clean shaven, wearing a beret and not making headline news..

in reality its called a UNIFORM.... we are all supposed to be UNIFORM(the same)

I guarantee his drill sgt's are not standing tall and proud because he squeaked by basic.

he is not Muslim

don't care.. he now is a uniformed service member... our military recognizes 36 different religions. you dont see any kids running around wearing a chicken bone neckless in dress blues, do?


if a Marine recruit pulls this in bootcamp he will be discharged.. if he waits until he is a Marine he will be discharged.. if he is seen wearing any item not authorized in unform he will be CHARGED

I love my country, I love my Corps. I'm sure the Army has better things to do than prance around in front of news crews explaining how they justify this.


this is what its about

- 2010 United States Marine Corps Birthday Message[/url]

 

[Vonderbach]

Hoorah, is that about it? All about pride and prejudice...not tolerance for something that might actually BENEFIT your armed forces? I suppose you can speak Hindi and Punjabi? No? Ok, well find me someone that can. Wait....they're in India...and they're Sikh? Well crap, screw it, we can't have no towel heads in the army.

Zero Tolerance is a fools tool.

Nobody has yet to provide a single valid reason why this exception should not be made. All I see is "it's tradition" or "it's the way we do things." How about a single valid reason. Anything that stems from the logic center of the brain would be nice.

 

[papi_ocho]

i have harsh views. and zero tact. but all this is opinion. i'm sure they sat behind a desk somewhere and decided that this was a chance to change how the world looked at our military.

not tolerance for something that might actually BENEFIT your armed forces? I suppose you can speak Hindi and Punjabi?

if his only intention was to come on board and translate- he could of got the same benefits package and better pay, to compensate for his career move, as a civilian contracter.

Zero Tolerance is a fools tool.

where's the line between tolerance and self preservation

here's what i googled last month when i found i was going to a unit thay may deploy me to afgan: india(insert country here) supporting terrorist

here's a quick link..
Musharraf accuses India of supporting terrorist activities inside Pakistan « Pakistanpal’s Blog

but i'm gonna go smoke this doobie while we hash this policy thing out.. cause i'm going to be the crusader that brings it back.

change got us this economy, health care and on and on..


is this religous? is there a differance? your baptized at birth with an option to be confirmed when you able to decide for yourself(almost every religion does this). your born straight and can be as homosexual as you want when you can decide for yourself.

we are making a change in the right direction

 

[Vonderbach]

Did you really just compare this Sikh to the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy and terrorism? Are you sure you want to draw that parallel? I have yet to see a legitimate argument against this.

And for the record, he didn't volunteer, he was actively recruited, meaning that our military solicited him, not the other way around. It's nice that he could work as a civilian, but I doubt seriously that anyone was jumping at the chance to hire him. The military saw value in his services, they hired him. It's as simple as that.

Also, do you have any clue who Musharraf is? Do you have any idea that India and Pakistan have been on the brink of war for decades now? Do you really want to take the word of a man that actually harbors terrorists in his country over that of a friendly nation such as India? Where do your loyalties lie?

 

[S4L]

Hoorah, is that about it? All about pride and prejudice...not tolerance for something that might actually BENEFIT your armed forces? I suppose you can speak Hindi and Punjabi? No? Ok, well find me someone that can. Wait....they're in India...and they're Sikh? Well crap, screw it, we can't have no towel heads in the army.

Zero Tolerance is a fools tool.

Nobody has yet to provide a single valid reason why this exception should not be made. All I see is "it's tradition" or "it's the way we do things." How about a single valid reason. Anything that stems from the logic center of the brain would be nice.

Wow.... Where to start..

1.) Wikipedia is NOT A VALID SOURCE according to ANY RESPECTED COLLEGE. While wikipedia does have some useful knowledge, it is not the end all.

2.) Sikkhism is a convergence of Hinduism and Islam, its beliefs come from both religions, which are much older than itself.

3.) Creating "exceptions" for individuals is a dangerous and slippery slope. This is something a military should not have to face. In order to have a STRONG military force, each individual soldier must be willing to FIGHT AND DIE for one another. When you start to allow for "special circumstances," you threaten the very core of your military force. This is exactly why gays in the military are a hot topic. As a very respectable general put it, are the guys on the front line willing to fight and die for an openly gay soldier? If they aren't, it shouldn't be allowed in the military.

4.) YES it is about "Hoorah" and pride. This is the eff'n U.S. Military, not some g. d. hippy organization. There is no "tolerance," this isn't some f'n social convention. Have you seen FMJ?

5.) I am more concerned that we allow people to become citizens so easily, do we really know where his allegiances lie? I.E. OSAMA

Now before you go gettin' all politically correct and pissy. No I am not calling this guy a terrorist, it is simply that the U.S. has a great track record of TRAINING EFF'N TERRORISTS. Osama, being the most known.

 

[S4L]

Did you really just compare this Sikh to the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy and terrorism? Are you sure you want to draw that parallel? I have yet to see a legitimate argument against this.

What is the difference?

 

[Vonderbach]

Wow.... Where to start..

1.) Wikipedia is NOT A VALID SOURCE according to ANY RESPECTED COLLEGE. While wikipedia does have some useful knowledge, it is not the end all.

I cited three additional sources. Wikipedia is perfectly valid for this forum. Can you find a source that repudiates the Wikipedia article? If so, please post it up.

2.) Sikkhism is a convergence of Hinduism and Islam, its beliefs come from both religions, which are much older than itself.

How is this relevant to anything?

3.) Creating "exceptions" for individuals is a dangerous and slippery slope. This is something a military should not have to face. In order to have a STRONG military force, each individual soldier must be willing to FIGHT AND DIE for one another. When you start to allow for "special circumstances," you threaten the very core of your military force. This is exactly why gays in the military are a hot topic. As a very respectable general put it, are the guys on the front line willing to fight and die for an openly gay soldier? If they aren't, it shouldn't be allowed in the military.

So what you're saying is that homosexuals are not worth the same as a heterosexual? And that Sikh's will also have less value as a human being? You have absolutely no faith in our soldiers. In fact, it's pretty damn insulting to say that our soldiers are incapable of bonding with someone just because they're "different." Are we in 5th grade?

4.) YES it is about "Hoorah" and pride. This is the eff'n U.S. Military, not some g. d. hippy organization. There is no "tolerance," this isn't some f'n social convention. Have you seen FMJ?

I try not to base my world views on fictional movies.

What is the difference?

Between a sikh, a homosexual and a terrorist? Seriously? At least there is some valid rationale to the homosexual issue (sexual attraction to other soldiers, shared quarters, bigotry, etc.) Nobody has yet to put forth a single valid reason why this would cause a problem. The only thing mentioned is disunity, which sounds to me like a problem with individual soldiers, not the Sikh in question.

 

[aussiekeeper]

Uh-HUH, next week he will open fire in the mess hall.................

 

[S4L]

I cited three additional sources. Wikipedia is perfectly valid for this forum. Can you find a source that repudiates the Wikipedia article? If so, please post it up.

Your three additional "sources" were amusing as well and finding a source to repudiate the wiki article would imply that the wiki article is false in its entirety. The fact that you said, "nuh uh, see, wiki said so too" is quite funny.

How is this relevant to anything?

That wasn't directed towards you, others seemed to not understand what exactly Sikkhism is. Go figure, considering it is a very small religion..

So what you're saying is that homosexuals are not worth the same as a heterosexual? And that Sikh's will also have less value as a human being? You have absolutely no faith in our soldiers. In fact, it's pretty damn insulting to say that our soldiers are incapable of bonding with someone just because they're "different." Are we in 5th grade?

Wow, you should be a reporter, way to twist things. Yes I am a homophobic, antisemitic, raghead hating redneck amurricon.

Nationwide, voters flocked to the poles to BLOCK GAYS FROM MARRYING. Would it not be logical to say, hmmmm... Maybe our country still doesn't have a tolerance for homosexuality? In ancient Greece, homosexuality was a very common thing, even among the Spartans. This probably helped create a great deal of cohension among the men in a phalanx, true love for one another.

It doesn't matter how you feel, or how I feel, or how Sam down the street feels. What matters is how the military, as a body, feels. If 50% of soldiers don't want gays in the military, you have a problem on your hands that needs to be carefully addressed. This goes for Sikhs, Jews, Rednecks, Mexicans, whatever. Division in the armed forces is not tolerable. If this division can be overcome and unity restored, than there is no problem. If it creates a divide, well, congrats you just imploded our military.

Between a sikh, a homosexual and a terrorist? Seriously? At least there is some valid rationale to the homosexual issue (sexual attraction to other soldiers, shared quarters, bigotry, etc.) Nobody has yet to put forth a single valid reason why this would cause a problem. The only thing mentioned is disunity, which sounds to me like a problem with individual soldiers, not the Sikh in question.

I took that comment as the difference between a gay and a sikh terrorist, not a gay, a sikh, and a terrorist. With that said, there is no difference, on a fundamental level, between someone who is a sikh and someone who is gay. These are two people who are different, they are a minority. To believe that there isn't some hostillity in the country towards gays, or any person wearing a turban, is naive. To believe that this hostility hasn't crossed over into our military is illogical and naive as well.


Yes, I also think that some of our soldiers are a little pissed this guy gets special treatment, look at the opinions on this forum. Do you really think they are any different between our soldiers? I would be pretty pissed if my employer said I couldn't have a beard, but that fellow over there can "Because it's his religion." Well guess what? My religion dictates I can wear a beard too, so f u and f him. (See where this is leading to?).

I don't think you understand the problem either. Our military is as strong as its weakest link. Our military is built from the ground up, the individual soldier. If the individual soldiers have an issue, then our military has an issue. Disunity IS THE PROBLEM.

On a personal level, I would much rather fight and die for my country, along side another American (who happens to be gay), than some guy from India that became a US citizen 15 days ago. Yeah.. I have a lot of faith in his allegiances...

 

[Vonderbach]

Ok, we're getting off track here. The military recruited this man. The conditions of his recruitment were that he retain his devout adherenace to Sikhism. So you obviously have a problem with this. Who do you want to blame, the man that was recruited or the military that solicited him and offered him the exception? You talk about pride, tradition,etc, but your own military commanders have decided that those things are not as important as language skills. So do you think your generals are just are just morons? Either you support your leadership in the military or you condemn them? These generals are soldiers too, so what do you have to say about them?

 

[Blue'87GT]

Von-I disagree with the fact that this man was given the exception to policy...not with the man himself. That is, that the US Army gave out this exception--the guy has little to do with my issues with this. I understand that they needed his skills, but I do not like the fact that the US Military has to lower its standards in order to gain his skills. We are all supposed to meet a standard when we join the service--that is the point of a "uniformed service". Either you toed the line with the standards when you completed training, or were put out of the service. It didn't matter if you had specialized skills, you were expected to meet those standards. In the USAF it's called "service before self"...one of our core values. Many of those who have never served have a hard time understanding this. Civilians usually have a "screw that!" attitude with this, finding it hard to believe that you have to change, not the military. Not real sure how else to explain this. FWIW, it's not some "General" making these decisions, it's the Department of the Army who made this decision. This type of approval would come from much higher than a recruiting station commander.

During the time I have been in (15 yrs), I have seen our military lower its standards (IMHO), to levels that are unbelieveable compared to just a decade ago. Ladies are allowed to have cornrow hairstyles due to their heritage, "stress cards" in basic training in the event that our recruits are feeling picked on or stressed out, all members of the US Army wearing berets...something reserved for those in specialized areas (Spec ops), etc, etc. Really unbelieveable changes!!!

 

[papi_ocho]

just an FYI for those interested in the process. and yes there is a lot more that goes into it.

recruiting process:
1 recruiter man finds prospect(mentally, morally, physically qualified)
2 probes mr prospect to find his goals in life
3 recruiter man sells mr prospect on the idea of being part of something that can help him achieve those goals
4 mr prospect accepts proposed features and benefits recruiter man talked about-prospect is now NEW WORKING APPLICANT
4.1 mr prospect has a draw back(religion-shave) recruiter man lets focus on the bigger picture. you want to be a ____ and my organization can give you that. all you have to do is over look your drawback. and don’t worry we recognize many many religions including yours. here’s a list.
4.2 mr prospect just doesn't know. he really doesn't want to change his ways to better himself and serve HIS(citizen right!) country. recruiter man well lets talk about what your beard provides you and if it outweighs what we've talked about then I my organization CAN NOT help you achieve your goals. and you will be on your way. thank you here's a business card. You should try next door.

5. mr prospect is now NWA... along with the enlistment process goes standards(hygiene) and many many other forms that cover terrorism. our national security screening form is designed to date back only 7years hence why so many naturalized citizens wait 10+ years to enlist(red flag-why did he wait so long to enlist-probe to find his need and hidden agenda)

I guarantee that his reason for joining was NOT to translate. Job choices and such are discussed after Mr prospect has made a commitment to join your organization. Translating was something that came up as the recruiter was probing his needs and that was an opportunity for Mr prospect to be more desirable to his recruiter(yellow flag).

Enlisting as a linguist requires another test called the DLAB. Very difficult. No study guide available. he is going to have TOP SECRET CLEARANCE. TOP SECRET.

6. process at MEPS. if you want to be a Marine you have to look like a Marine the day you process.. clean cut, neat in appearance, slacks/pants, collared shirt, clean shoes, smell clean.
if you don’t want to look the part then you cant take the challenge to be the part

7. now mr NWA is mr Poolee. Mr poolee will have rules and regulations while he waits his turn to go to bootcamp 3weeks to as long as 1year. regulations including proper hygiene and clean appearance, physical fitness


8. poolees represent that recruiter that service that state this country. if you enlist the overweight kid from the special ed department is that who your branch is looking for? how about the kid with the gang tattoo's? or the kid that beat his mom and his sister into the hospital? or the guy with the DUI charges?

MOST recruiters are very selective and if Mr prospect does not show his dedication to want to change his past to better his future then why waste time changing your service(organization) to accommodate someone that isn’t really that serious about being in your service


will his unit benefit from him being a member of it? of course they will.

did the guys behind the desk make a sound tactical decision? yes they did

anyone else feel like saying it "HEY if there is a black president than I can (insert desire here)"

I’m not paid to question orders. I’m trained to perform.

 

[S4L]

During the time I have been in (15 yrs), I have seen our military lower its standards (IMHO), to levels that are unbelieveable compared to just a decade ago. Ladies are allowed to have cornrow hairstyles due to their heritage, "stress cards" in basic training in the event that our recruits are feeling picked on or stressed out, all members of the US Army wearing berets...something reserved for those in specialized areas (Spec ops), etc, etc. Really unbelieveable changes!!!

I agree, part of the reason I brought up FMJ. I remember the Marine Corps ostracizing that drill sargeant for "bullying" some poor depressed recruit. If you can't handle a drill sargeant getting in your face, doing what he is supposed to do, then maybe you shouldn't be armed with an m16 fighting in the frontlines. Just sayin..

I agree with the rest of what you said as well.

 

[papi_ocho]

- R. Lee Ermey GEICO Commercial - Therapist Sarge[/url]

 

[afterhours]

a few weeks ago, we spent several days.....multiple pages to discuss gays in the military.

at that time it was made clear by the bigots, that the military should be allowed to make the rules. not civilians and not the "Liberal" court system or even Congress.

the Military leadership knows what is needed....

when it invloves keeping gays out, or allowing the persecution of gays....the Military knows what is best.

The military has rules that should be followed....and gays should not be allowed to serve.

However, now that the leadership has made a decision to allow this man to wear his turban and beard....there is a problem.

bigotry and hypocrisy....not surprising.

 

[busaMD]

Do you also suggest Christians put America before Jesus...



cheers
ken

sure, why not