There are legitimate reasons to question whether DADT should be repealed and replaced with UCMJ rulings that allow gays to openly serve.  Some appear to be taking sides over PFC Manning's traitorous actions because he's gay.  I believe that has nothing at all to do with his acts; he's simply and completely a dirtbag who deserves to spend the rest of his life behind bars.  Gay or not. 

However, I haven't seen a lot of discussion about how the military branches will handle gays.  Will there be separate barracks?  Separate areas on board ships?  Separate tents in the field?  Will gays who have been married in states that recognize gay marriage be given married quarters?  Will they get dependent pay?  Will their gay partner be given a dependent ID card and will they be using military facilities?  If the gay couple comes from a state that doesn't recognize gay marriage, will they be allowed to sue for the above amenities when they are on federal ground (i.e. the military facility)?  What about gays that are married but serving in states where gay marriage isn't allowed?  There may be local laws that interfere with a gay's rights as recognized by the Services.  How will the Services "fix" that?  

There are a lot of things that affect the military that have nothing to do with patriotism or ability to fight an enemy.  I'd be the first to recognize that gays have, do, and will continue to serve honorably for this nation and the citizenry.  But just saying that gays serving openly will have no effect on the combat effectiveness of the military is a long way away from saying that gays serving openly will have no effect on the military.  I'd love to say that the military's main concern in all this is how it will affect combat readiness, but having served 22 years in the Army, I know that combat effectiveness is secondary to a lot of social engineering.  Hasn't always been that way, but attend any IG, EO, EEO or CO2 class in the Army, and you'll recognize right away that there are many, too many, people who view the Army as a social experiment and not a fighting force that is designed to fight and win America's land wars.  These people, almost all civilians, can fuck up anything that Congress designs for a smooth transition from DADT.  And they will, for sure. 

All I'm saying is that there's no reason to believe that Congress and the Services will be able to know to any degree, what openly serving gays will mean to the overall performance of any of the Services.  It may be an experiment worth taking today, in the middle of two wars.  That's open to debate.  But what is not open to debate is the fact that if there is a way to screw this up for both gay and straight servicemen and women, Congress and the DoD nannies will do it.