I've been watching the testimony of Petraeus and Crocker for the past two days. Something happened just a few minutes ago that I just have to share. The words are from Senator Robert Byrd of the Armed Services Committee while addressing Ambassador Crocker. My transcription may not be perfect but it's fresh off the presses so to speak.

"You are saying that we can't have a political solution until we have security and we can't have security until we have a political solution. This sounds an awful lot like a dog that is chasing it's tail. A breeder would tell you that this isn't the puppy to pick."

Whatever else you might think about Robert Byrd, he is one of a kind. And I am proud that he is a United States Senator.

There's more...

General John Shalikashvili, former joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman, said in an op-ed this week that change is needed on our Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Pursue, Don't Harass (DADT) policy for gay servicemembers. (While the oft-dropped "Don't Pursue" has always been part of the policy, seems as if Defense Department added the bit on harassment in 2000.) DADT is a Washington creation, a compromise made by the whole city. In 1992, at the White House, Clinton wanted to issue an executive order opening the military to gay soldiers. Across the river, the Pentagon objected. Up on Capitol Hill, the Senate got a moratorium on any policy change and commenced to hold a series of hearings. When through the months, a "don't ask, don't tell" consensus emerged, a battered Clinton claimed it as his new plan. Congress passed the compromise into law, Clinton signed it, and the Defense Department implemented it as policy for U.S. armed servicemembers throughout the world.

The relevant section of the law, 10 U.S.C § 654, reads in part:

The presence in the armed forces of persons who demonstrate a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts would create an unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability.

Perhaps natural for policy made in the way this one was, in practice it's confusing stuff. Testifying before Congress at the time, even then Defense Secretary Les Aspin wasn't sure whether or not a declaration like "I am a homosexual" would result in a military separation.

In many ways, the policy today is nobody's child. No one really wants to claim it as their own. As it stands, power to change it rests with Congress, who can pass new law to guide DOD regulations. The process of getting Congress to pass such a law would be greatly eased by getting DOD buy-in. And for its part, DOD has long argued that its hands are tied by Congress. (The statement of one Undersecretary of Defense is fairly typical of the Pentagon's public stand on the matter: "The Department's position is to administer the law in a manner that is both fair and consistent.")

There's more...