EDIT: I apologize for my assumption that the DADT was equally applied to trans* service members (or really, to anyone not GLB). It is not.
Warning, rambling thoughts lie ahead.
So here's kinda how I feel about those ideas at this moment. At my campus's Feminist Alliance meeting a couple of months ago, the topic of the draft came up. Apparently some people want to change the laws so that women are part of the draft. I reject this idea. It's a step backwards, in my opinion. Yes, it would be more "equal" in the particular context of US military recruitment. But it would not advance any of the other causes I believe in, like pushing towards a world without war. It is MUCH more vital and important, in my opinion, to change the laws so that there is no draft at all. I think a truly volunteer military sends the message that NOT everyone thinks it's appropriate to go to war, even some of the time (I like to loudly tell people, when the subject comes up, that if I were drafted I would leave and go to Canada, or wherever, because to me even living in America and having American citizenship isn't worth fighting a war - though I make an exception in my personal philosophy for the unlikely case if we were actually defending ourselves on our own soil - essentially the opposite of the kind of war we're fighting right now).
Anyway. If we were changing the law to legalize the draft for queer-identified
GBL people, I would oppose that. But since this is for the volunteer aspect of the military, I'm more or less in support. A) Some TBQLIG
BLG folk may feel that the existence of the military is right, and now they can express that by joining, if they want. B) Those who don't want to join still don't have to, and now that can be a rejection with a bit more oomph (or at least what I perceive as more oomph). For example, I *could* join the military. There is nothing preventing me at this time - except for my vocal objection to the existence of militaries/violence-promoting-organizations (well, that and the fact that I hate running...). And I think rejecting something that I have a legal right to do is more powerful than rejecting something I've been excluded from - the latter option sounds like sour grapes, in my ears. Maybe others don't see things that way.
There's also the semi-bright side of being subversive from within. From being with me and learning through me about issues about violence against women, my partner doesn't just side with his soldier automatically when there is a domestic disturbance case in front of him (I use the term "disturbance" because I'm talking about all manner of family issues, not just violent ones). But there's definitely a culture of believing wives/girlfriends with complaints are all harpies, and rejecting that culture is non-negligible on the activist spectrum. So if a soldier is, now, at the very least not legally afraid of having someone guess ze is queer
LBG, then that person is free to take more progressive action within the military community (because ze can't get kicked out for it, losing their livelihood, anymore). Since I really don't see prospects for ridding ourselves of the military in a lifetime, or even ten lifetimes, I'll settle for making it less conservative. But that's just me and I know that approach isn't acceptable to everyone. I don't know how to approach that, though, other than to engage in general peace-activism.
These ideas are all sort of half-formed and nebulous, I know. And I don't think these are the end-all of my thoughts on the matter. Quixotess, when I read your original post, my heart sank a bit, because I agree with a lot of those ideas/questions, and I was kind of sad that I can no longer support the repeal of DADT with a whole heart. So I second Hex's statement, "Wherever you/they feel like pulling up a chair." I guess my previous paragraphs were sort of trying to answer the question of where to find good in assimilationist victories.
On the bright(?) side, the whole Western lifestyle will probably collapse here in the next century and all this will be moot! Whee!