Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
PSA
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 1/9/2005 3:44:55 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/9/2005 3:45:25 AM EDT by sydney7629]
Yeah, I know it's a liberal news rag out of England.  Is there any chance that this many have deserted our armed forces since the war began?

Deserters

American Army soldiers are deserting and fleeing to Canada rather than fight in Iraq, rekindling memories of the thousands of draft-dodgers who flooded north to avoid service in Vietnam.

An estimated 5,500 men and women have deserted since the invasion of Iraq, reflecting Washington's growing problems with troop morale.
 
Jeremy Hinzman: a 'wrong career choice'

Jeremy Hinzman, 26, from South Dakota, who deserted from the 82nd Airborne, is among those who - to the disgust of Pentagon officials - have applied for refugee status in Canada.

The United States Army treats deserters as common criminals, posting them on "wanted" lists with the FBI, state police forces and the Department of Home Security border patrols.

Hinzman said last week: "This is a criminal war and any act of violence in an unjustified conflict is an atrocity. I signed a contract for four years, and I was totally willing to fulfil it. Just not in combat arms jobs."

Hinzman, who served as a cook in Afghanistan, was due to join a fighting unit in Iraq after being refused status as a conscientious objector.

He realised that he had made the "wrong career choice" as he marched with his platoon of recruits all chanting, "Train to kill, kill we will".

He said: "At that point a light went off in my head. I was told in basic training that if I'm given an illegal or immoral order, it is my duty to disobey it. I feel that invading and occupying Iraq is an illegal and immoral thing to do.''

Pte Brandon Hughey, 19, who deserted from the 1st Cavalry Division at Fort Hood, Texas, said that he had volunteered because the army offered to pay his college fees. He began training soon after the invasion of Iraq but became disillusioned when no weapons of mass destruction were found.

"I had been willing to die to make America safe," he said. "I found out, basically, that they found no weapons of mass destruction and the claim that they made about ties to al-Qaeda was coming up short. It made me angry. I felt our lives as soldiers were being thrown away."

When he was ordered to deploy to Iraq, Hughey searched the internet for an "underground railroad" operation, through which deserting troops are helped to escape to Canada.

He was put in touch with a Quaker pacifist couple who had helped Vietnam draft-dodgers and was driven from Texas to Ontario.

The Pentagon says that the level of desertion is no higher than usual and denies that it is having difficulty persuading troops to fight. The flight to Canada is, however, an embarrassment for the military, which is suffering from a recruiting shortfall for the National Guard and the Army Reserves.

The deaths of 18 American soldiers in a suicide bomb attack in Mosul, northern Iraq, last month, was a further blow to morale. Soon after, the number of American soldiers killed since President Bush declared that large-scale combat operations were at an end passed the 1,000 mark.

Lt Col Joe Richard, a Pentagon spokesman, said that the US government wanted the deserters to be returned from Canada. "If you don't want to fight, don't join," he said.

"The men in Canada have an obligation to fulfil their military contracts and do their duty. If and when they return to this country, they will be prosecuted."

The penalty for desertion in wartime can be death. Most deserters, however, serve up to five years in a military prison before receiving a dishonourable discharge.

In order to stay in Canada, deserters must convince an immigration board that they would face not just prosecution but also "persecution" if they returned to America. Hinzman's hearing has begun in Toronto and a decision is expected next month.

During the Vietnam war an estimated 55,000 deserters or draft-dodgers fled to Canada. There were amnesties for both groups in the late 1970s under President Jimmy Carter, but many stayed.

One who did so is Jeffrey House, a Toronto-based lawyer, who represents some of the deserters. He said that at least 25 had reached Canada in recent months with the help of "railroad" organisations, and believed that the immigration board would back his clients
Link Posted: 1/9/2005 3:49:01 AM EDT
The Telegraph is a conservative (Tory) newspaper in the UK.
Link Posted: 1/9/2005 3:51:31 AM EDT

Originally Posted By raven:
The Telegraph is a conservative (Tory) newspaper in the UK.



I did not know that.  I must have gotten it confused with The Globe or whatever the name of that other paper is.

Link Posted: 1/9/2005 4:04:51 AM EDT
These are both two people who serve as excellent examples of the exact kind of people we DON'T NEED in our armed forces. One clearly was there just to get money for college. The other was there for God knows what reason, but once he saw he might have to fight beat feat.

Folks, the military is and always will be a fighting force first. It's not a friggin Summer camp. If you join the military, you may find yourself in a situation where you could be killed or forced to kill. If you are not up to that task, you have no business wearing the uniform.

These two shitheads clearly wanted the benefits, but they didn't want to do their part in earning it. I don't feel the slightest bit sorry for either. They knew what they were getting into and as such, took their chances. They can say what they wish about "feeling the war is immoral" or that they obejct to killing, but really what it means is that they are fucking cowards who thought they could join, never have to do anything and then collect from Uncle Sam. Let them stay in Canada. We don't need them here. And good riddance I might add.

At least one good thing will come from this war. And to quote R. Lee Ermey, it will "weed out all non-hackers who are not packed the gear to serve in our beloved Corps", or whatever branch may be the case.

-CH
Link Posted: 1/9/2005 4:05:05 AM EDT
During the Vietnam war an estimated 55,000 deserters or draft-dodgers fled to Canada.

Both now and then, when you are killing folks ya went to liberate and are being killed by those same folk.......

Link Posted: 1/9/2005 4:08:30 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/9/2005 4:09:02 AM EDT by Iceshark03]

Hinzman said last week: "This is a criminal war and any act of violence in an unjustified conflict is an atrocity. I signed a contract for four years, and I was totally willing to fulfil it. Just not in combat arms jobs."....

Hinzman, who served as a cook in Afghanistan, was due to join a fighting unit in Iraq after being refused status as a conscientious objector......

He realised that he had made the "wrong career choice" as he marched with his platoon of recruits all chanting, "Train to kill, kill we will".



Too bad he didn't think about the possibility he might be ordered to do something he didn't want to before joining.  I sympathize with him for doing what he felt was right, but at least he figured out his mistake instead of blaming it on the military.
Link Posted: 1/9/2005 4:30:19 AM EDT
I know I'll probably get pummeled for saying this BUT..... Is it ever possible that an American waged war might be unjust and therefore not to fight it is the correct  moral choice? Since When have we Replaced the judgment of Jesus with That of Bush? Jesus was God and therfore Infallable. Bush Is a human being who was elected not by 100% of the population but by a slim majority, so He can make mistakes right? How do you know this War is right? Just cause the white house says so? Just cause 52% of the population says so? You can make arguments for your point but unless a cloud appears over the White house and has a booming voice saying "AMERICA IS RIGHT" you're just guessing like everyone else. Now don't try to debate me on the merits of this particular war. I'm speaking to the concept of refusing to fight for any war throughout history that you might have felt was unjust. Some people say "oh he took the oath" now he has to fulfill that and follow orders. Well guess what? We hung people at Nurenberg for doing just that. We claim to say to the world that a soldier must disobey what he belives to be an illegal order. But is'nt it up to each individual soldier to make that determination? Besides these people are not worth the trouble, if they go to a theatre rather than prison it could be bad for morale and esprit'd corp. Just let them go. Should they be able to Stay in the US? No. But neither should they be hunted like criminals.
Link Posted: 1/9/2005 4:37:52 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/9/2005 4:39:33 AM EDT by bgcc11]

Originally Posted By t-stox:
I know I'll probably get pummeled for saying this BUT..... Is it ever possible that an American waged war might be unjust and therefore not to fight it is the correct  moral choice? Since When have we Replaced the judgment of Jesus with That of Bush? Jesus was God and therfore Infallable. Bush Is a human being who was elected not by 100% of the population but by a slim majority, so He can make mistakes right? How do you know this War is right? Just cause the white house says so? Just cause 52% of the population says so? You can make arguments for your point but unless a cloud appears over the White house and has a booming voice saying "AMERICA IS RIGHT" you're just guessing like everyone else. Now don't try to debate me on the merits of this particular war. I'm speaking to the concept of refusing to fight for any war throughout history that you might have felt was unjust. Some people say "oh he took the oath" now he has to fulfill that and follow orders. Well guess what? We hung people at Nurenberg for doing just that. We claim to say to the world that a soldier must disobey what he belives to be an illegal order. But is'nt it up to each individual soldier to make that determination? Besides these people are not worth the trouble, if they go to a theatre rather than prison it could be bad for morale and esprit'd corp. Just let them go. Should they be able to Stay in the US? No. But neither should they be hunted like criminals.



I think you are correct about the war and the way the civilian leadership has ignored profesional military advise and made this a missionless, nonspecific enemy, free fire zone.
BUT
Soldiers aren't paid to think or have opinions or be an individual.
It dont work when individuality festers.
This is why civilians must keep our employees in our govt in check before they have a chance to use the military for geo-political/financial reasons.
Link Posted: 1/9/2005 4:46:03 AM EDT

Originally Posted By t-stox:
I know I'll probably get pummeled for saying this BUT..... Is it ever possible that an American waged war might be unjust and therefore not to fight it is the correct  moral choice? Since When have we Replaced the judgment of Jesus with That of Bush? Jesus was God and therfore Infallable. Bush Is a human being who was elected not by 100% of the population but by a slim majority, so He can make mistakes right? How do you know this War is right? Just cause the white house says so? Just cause 52% of the population says so? You can make arguments for your point but unless a cloud appears over the White house and has a booming voice saying "AMERICA IS RIGHT" you're just guessing like everyone else. Now don't try to debate me on the merits of this particular war. I'm speaking to the concept of refusing to fight for any war throughout history that you might have felt was unjust. Some people say "oh he took the oath" now he has to fulfill that and follow orders. Well guess what? We hung people at Nurenberg for doing just that. We claim to say to the world that a soldier must disobey what he belives to be an illegal order. But is'nt it up to each individual soldier to make that determination? Besides these people are not worth the trouble, if they go to a theatre rather than prison it could be bad for morale and esprit'd corp. Just let them go. Should they be able to Stay in the US? No. But neither should they be hunted like criminals.



While I agree with you that every individual must decide for themselves whether or not they feel an action is just, you have to understand how much time and money the government has invested in each soldier.  Living expenses alone add up, not to mention the ammo they use to train amongst other things such as the tax breaks they receive.  The government invested in that soldier, and when called upon he finally thought about the reality of the situation and bailed.  This war is not the first in which soldiers have been sent to do things they might not agree with.  

These guys should have put more thought into the decision to enlist before becoming free loaders.  Some guy lives in your house, wears your clothes, eats your food, and when called upon to pay rent just takes off.  You gonna be happy about it?
Link Posted: 1/9/2005 4:48:45 AM EDT
The vast majority of their counterparts are over in Iraq right now doing what they were trained to do. They didn't just up and leave. These few who did do that are not special. The guys who went and fought (and are fighting) are special because they are showing loyalty to their units and their nation. And these men are doing so, regardless of what they feel personally.

So again, men who would just turn their backs on their units and walk away aren't worthy of mentioning here. Let's save the bandwidth for stories about the guys who were willing to hold up their end of the bargain.

-CH
Link Posted: 1/9/2005 4:52:35 AM EDT

Originally Posted By t-stox:
Is it ever possible that an American waged war might be unjust and therefore not to fight it is the correct  moral choice?



You're right that not fighting may be a correct moral choice, but if you are a sworn soldier, you must fight.


Originally Posted By t-stox:
Since When have we Replaced the judgment of Jesus with That of Bush?



"Give unto Ceaser what is Ceaser's and give unto God what is God's".  The Bible quote refers to money but there are other quotes that make it clear that God wants us to obey 'human' leaders.  


Originally Posted By t-stox: How do you know this War is right? . . .  I'm speaking to the concept of refusing to fight for any war throughout history that you might have felt was unjust. Some people say "oh he took the oath" now he has to fulfill that and follow orders. Well guess what? We hung people at Nurenberg for doing just that. We claim to say to the world that a soldier must disobey what he belives to be an illegal order. But is'nt it up to each individual soldier to make that determination?


There are well-established laws of war.  The Nazi's broke them and were punished.  The deserters have broken laws as well and are going to be punished.


Originally Posted By t-stox:
Besides these people are not worth the trouble, if they go to a theatre rather than prison it could be bad for morale and esprit'd corp. Just let them go. Should they be able to Stay in the US? No. But neither should they be hunted like criminals.



If we don't make an example of them, that will be worse for moral.
Link Posted: 1/9/2005 4:57:02 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/9/2005 5:08:09 AM EDT by bgcc11]

Originally Posted By C-4:
Originally Posted By t-stox:
Originally Posted By t-stox:
Since When have we Replaced the judgment of Jesus with That of Bush?



"Give unto Ceaser what is Ceaser's and give unto God what is God's".  The Bible quote refers to money but there are other quotes that make it clear that God wants us to obey 'human' leaders.  



Off topic, but

Any new testament refrences to back this up?
Or;
Does Jesus ever proclaim that we obey human leaders?
Link Posted: 1/9/2005 5:34:08 AM EDT

These are both two people who serve as excellent examples of the exact kind of people we DON'T NEED in our armed forces. One clearly was there just to get money for college.


Our local Guard infantry company is in Afghanistan.  Yet, the marquis out front and posters in the armory all advertise college money and bonus in exchange for enlistment.  Nothing about fighting in the Yankee army.  Bait and switch?  How about a little truth in advertising?

bgcc11-You have mail.
Link Posted: 1/9/2005 5:34:45 AM EDT

Originally Posted By t-stox:
I know I'll probably get pummeled for saying this BUT..... Is it ever possible that an American waged war might be unjust and therefore not to fight it is the correct  moral choice?



Yes, it's possible.  It's simply not the case.
Link Posted: 1/9/2005 5:35:15 AM EDT

Originally Posted By sydney7629:
Yeah, I know it's a liberal news rag out of England.  Is there any chance that this many have deserted our armed forces since the war began?



No.
Link Posted: 1/9/2005 5:58:24 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/9/2005 6:06:02 AM EDT

Originally Posted By bgcc11:

Originally Posted By C-4:
Originally Posted By t-stox:
Originally Posted By t-stox:
Since When have we Replaced the judgment of Jesus with That of Bush?



"Give unto Ceaser what is Ceaser's and give unto God what is God's".  The Bible quote refers to money but there are other quotes that make it clear that God wants us to obey 'human' leaders.  



Off topic, but

Any new testament refrences to back this up?
Or;
Does Jesus ever proclaim that we obey human leaders?



I am not a Bible scholar and I cannot quote chapter and verse.

That said, when the authorities came to arrest Jesus, IIRC Peter cut the ear off one of the soldiers.  Jesus objected and re-attached the ear.  He then went with the soldiers/authorities.
 
Link Posted: 1/9/2005 6:15:38 AM EDT

Originally Posted By bgcc11:

Originally Posted By C-4:
Originally Posted By t-stox:
Originally Posted By t-stox:
Since When have we Replaced the judgment of Jesus with That of Bush?



"Give unto Ceaser what is Ceaser's and give unto God what is God's".  The Bible quote refers to money but there are other quotes that make it clear that God wants us to obey 'human' leaders.  



Off topic, but

Any new testament refrences to back this up?
Or;
Does Jesus ever proclaim that we obey human leaders?



Yes.  Romans 13:1-7
1Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
   
  2Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.

   
  3For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:

   
  4For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.

   
  5Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.

   
  6For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.

   
  7Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.

Link Posted: 1/9/2005 6:38:38 AM EDT

Originally Posted By RikWriter:

Originally Posted By bgcc11:

Originally Posted By C-4:
Originally Posted By t-stox:
Originally Posted By t-stox:
Since When have we Replaced the judgment of Jesus with That of Bush?



"Give unto Ceaser what is Ceaser's and give unto God what is God's".  The Bible quote refers to money but there are other quotes that make it clear that God wants us to obey 'human' leaders.  



Off topic, but

Any new testament refrences to back this up?
Or;
Does Jesus ever proclaim that we obey human leaders?



Yes.  Romans 13:1-7
1Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
   
  2Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.

   
  3For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:

   
  4For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.

   
  5Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.

   
  6For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.

   
  7Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.




That chapter is kinda hard to read.
This last verse seems clear though

13:14 But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof.
Link Posted: 1/9/2005 7:01:34 AM EDT

Originally Posted By t-stox:
I know I'll probably get pummeled for saying this BUT..... Is it ever possible that an American waged war might be unjust and therefore not to fight it is the correct  moral choice?



You're right on! I cannot find any way to justify this war.



Since When have we Replaced the judgment of Jesus with That of Bush? Jesus was God and therfore Infallable. Bush Is a human being who was elected not by 100% of the population but by a slim majority, so He can make mistakes right? How do you know this War is right? Just cause the white house says so? Just cause 52% of the population says so? You can make arguments for your point but unless a cloud appears over the White house and has a booming voice saying "AMERICA IS RIGHT" you're just guessing like everyone else. Now don't try to debate me on the merits of this particular war. I'm speaking to the concept of refusing to fight for any war throughout history that you might have felt was unjust. Some people say "oh he took the oath" now he has to fulfill that and follow orders. Well guess what? We hung people at Nurenberg for doing just that. We claim to say to the world that a soldier must disobey what he belives to be an illegal order. But is'nt it up to each individual soldier to make that determination? Besides these people are not worth the trouble, if they go to a theatre rather than prison it could be bad for morale and esprit'd corp. Just let them go. Should they be able to Stay in the US? No. But neither should they be hunted like criminals.



The soldiers have taken an oath, but they are people too. Don't gimme the "they gotta do their job" bit, they're not building value for society, they are partaking in a destructive undertaking that they feel is unjust. And they have to pick up a rifle and take another human life to do so. You can't compare that with some 9 to 5 guy putting in dashboards on a Camry.

I cannot condone leaving your post, or deserting your job as a soldier. But I can't support this unjust war, either.
Link Posted: 1/9/2005 7:09:23 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Slv2fun:

The soldiers have taken an oath, but they are people too. Don't gimme the "they gotta do their job" bit, they're not building value for society, they are partaking in a destructive undertaking that they feel is unjust. And they have to pick up a rifle and take another human life to do so. You can't compare that with some 9 to 5 guy putting in dashboards on a Camry.



The role of an elisted soldier is not "building value for society" - if they want to do that, they can volunteer for Habitat for Humanity or the Peace Corps or something.

The role of an elisted soldier is to follow lawful orders to the best of their ability.  PERIOD!   If an elisted man want to make judgments about whether a war or activity is a good idea or not, he can go to west point/quantico/etc. and become an officer and work his way up to higher levels of authority - or he can become a politician and work his way up to the civilian leadership of the military.



I cannot condone leaving your post, or deserting your job as a soldier. But I can't support this unjust war, either.



One has nothing to do with the other.  A professional soldier's "support" for foreign policy formulated by the civilian leadership, or strategy formulated by his superiors, is NOT required.  
Link Posted: 1/9/2005 7:11:19 AM EDT
Originally Posted By sydney7629:
Yeah, I know it's a liberal news rag out of England.  Is there any chance that this many have deserted our armed forces since the war began?

You're thinking of the Guardian.

They're the liberal, leftist leaning weenies...
Link Posted: 1/9/2005 8:28:29 AM EDT

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By Slv2fun:

The soldiers have taken an oath, but they are people too. Don't gimme the "they gotta do their job" bit, they're not building value for society, they are partaking in a destructive undertaking that they feel is unjust. And they have to pick up a rifle and take another human life to do so. You can't compare that with some 9 to 5 guy putting in dashboards on a Camry.



The role of an elisted soldier is not "building value for society" - if they want to do that, they can volunteer for Habitat for Humanity or the Peace Corps or something.

The role of an elisted soldier is to follow lawful orders to the best of their ability.  PERIOD!   If an elisted man want to make judgments about whether a war or activity is a good idea or not, he can go to west point/quantico/etc. and become an officer and work his way up to higher levels of authority - or he can become a politician and work his way up to the civilian leadership of the military.



I cannot condone leaving your post, or deserting your job as a soldier. But I can't support this unjust war, either.



One has nothing to do with the other.  A professional soldier's "support" for foreign policy formulated by the civilian leadership, or strategy formulated by his superiors, is NOT required.  



+1

Saw the same "Instant C.O." crap during sandbox I - usually, a doctor or lawyer would get called up 6-7 years into an 8 year NG/USAR hitch, then suddenly would "get a conscience" and realize that "war was wrong". Of course. getting checks to an educational institution from Uncle on their behalf  for the first four years was perfectly OK.

So it was OK to take the money, but not OK to fulfill your responsibility...

They signed up of their own volition.

They knew (or should have if they were allowed to not live life with a caretaker) that there was a chance that they might have to go somewhere or do something and <gasp> Uncle wouldn't ask them if they wanted to first.

It's called enlisting - "E" or "O", your ass belongs to Uncle, until HE says it doesn't.
Link Posted: 1/9/2005 8:30:45 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/9/2005 8:31:48 AM EDT by jimb100]

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By Slv2fun:

The soldiers have taken an oath, but they are people too. Don't gimme the "they gotta do their job" bit, they're not building value for society, they are partaking in a destructive undertaking that they feel is unjust. And they have to pick up a rifle and take another human life to do so. You can't compare that with some 9 to 5 guy putting in dashboards on a Camry.



The role of an elisted soldier is not "building value for society" - if they want to do that, they can volunteer for Habitat for Humanity or the Peace Corps or something.

The role of an elisted soldier is to follow lawful orders to the best of their ability.  PERIOD!   If an elisted man want to make judgments about whether a war or activity is a good idea or not, he can go to west point/quantico/etc. and become an officer and work his way up to higher levels of authority - or he can become a politician and work his way up to the civilian leadership of the military.



I cannot condone leaving your post, or deserting your job as a soldier. But I can't support this unjust war, either.



One has nothing to do with the other.  A professional soldier's "support" for foreign policy formulated by the civilian leadership, or strategy formulated by his superiors, is NOT required.  



If you are a person of faith, a 'Christian', for example, when it comes to war don't you have to ask yourself "Is this what Jesus would want me to do?"

I am not a religious person but I have read the bible and can't for the life of me ever found Jesus to have condoned killing, under any circumstances. If, I'm wrong. I'd like some to point out to me where Jesus advocated violence.

As an atheist, I hold that my personal ethic guides me in determining if an action is 'right' or 'wrong.'

I wouldn't think people of faith would not have so much choice in the matter.
Link Posted: 1/9/2005 8:59:49 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/9/2005 9:03:22 AM EDT by TacticalMan]

Originally Posted By jimb100:

I am not a religious person but I have read the bible and can't for the life of me ever found Jesus to have condoned killing, under any circumstances. If, I'm wrong. I'd like some to point out to me where Jesus advocated violence.




Well, he very physically threw the money changers out of the temple using a stick to beat them and destroyed their booths. He talked to soldiers but only told them to do their jobs honorably and to refrain from stealing and extortion.

The Old Testament is full of  instances where God commands his people to go to war and instances where God supports his people in war.  In at least one instance, God commanded the Israelites to kill everybody in the enemy city.

Defending national interests is not an immoral thing.


PS: All rags in England are liberal, it's just a small matter of degree.
Link Posted: 1/9/2005 9:33:58 AM EDT
God uses governments to punish the wicked. however i dont know his thoughts so i dont know if what were doing is 100% righteous i can only speculate
Link Posted: 1/9/2005 9:45:06 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/9/2005 9:45:34 AM EDT by NYPatriot]

An estimated 5,500 men and women have deserted since the invasion of Iraq, reflecting Washington's growing problems with troop morale.


Estimated by whom & based on what information???

I read the whole article & it appears that they just plucked that number out of thin air.
Link Posted: 1/9/2005 9:48:30 AM EDT

Originally Posted By jimb100:
If you are a person of faith, a 'Christian', for example, when it comes to war don't you have to ask yourself "Is this what Jesus would want me to do?"

I am not a religious person but I have read the bible and can't for the life of me ever found Jesus to have condoned killing, under any circumstances. If, I'm wrong. I'd like some to point out to me where Jesus advocated violence.

As an atheist, I hold that my personal ethic guides me in determining if an action is 'right' or 'wrong.'

I wouldn't think people of faith would not have so much choice in the matter.




And that's a fine and interesting argument to have if we were talking about a DRAFTED force - but the U.S. army is 100% VOLUNTEER.  

Nobody wears a U.S. military uniform, whether active duty, reserves, or NG - that didn't CHOOSE to do so, having all the knowledge and information available to them at the time they made their decision.

Link Posted: 1/9/2005 10:20:37 AM EDT

Originally Posted By t-stox:
I know I'll probably get pummeled for saying this BUT..... Is it ever possible that an American waged war might be unjust and therefore not to fight it is the correct  moral choice? Since When have we Replaced the judgment of Jesus with That of Bush? Jesus was God and therfore Infallable. Bush Is a human being who was elected not by 100% of the population but by a slim majority, so He can make mistakes right? How do you know this War is right? Just cause the white house says so? Just cause 52% of the population says so? You can make arguments for your point but unless a cloud appears over the White house and has a booming voice saying "AMERICA IS RIGHT" you're just guessing like everyone else. Now don't try to debate me on the merits of this particular war. I'm speaking to the concept of refusing to fight for any war throughout history that you might have felt was unjust. Some people say "oh he took the oath" now he has to fulfill that and follow orders. Well guess what? We hung people at Nurenberg for doing just that. We claim to say to the world that a soldier must disobey what he belives to be an illegal order. But is'nt it up to each individual soldier to make that determination? Besides these people are not worth the trouble, if they go to a theatre rather than prison it could be bad for morale and esprit'd corp. Just let them go. Should they be able to Stay in the US? No. But neither should they be hunted like criminals.


 Please don't ever join up. There are those of us who serve or have served because we love this Country, it wasen't for money, [for damn sure] glory, or 8 hour days. We VOLENTARILY chose to give up some of our rights to serve this Country. Many will never understand this as they are more then happy to mooch their "freedom" off someone else who serves. If someone joins for the education and says see-ya when TSHTF, fuck em, the truth is they are really a f--kin coward and POS who does not deserve the American way of life and spent to much of their life watching j springer and how it's not their fault.
 I understand completely why we are in Iraq, some of the reasons are called korea, syria, and iran. If you do not think that other muslim countries were not watching to see if we would blink, you are wrong, we can either help the process of liberty now or in 50 years well be fighting 20 countries of crazes psycho muslin extremists who all have no problem with wiping you and your whole family off the face of the earth. And unfortunately, a whole bunch of them are already here if you have not noticed. I do disagree with us being PC, I am of the mind to give the people 24 hours to GTFO and then wipe out everyone left behind who wants to fight. If all leave clean out everything that can be made into a weapon. TFB. Just my .02
Link Posted: 1/9/2005 10:38:11 AM EDT

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:
And that's a fine and interesting argument to have if we were talking about a DRAFTED force - but the U.S. army is 100% VOLUNTEER.  

Nobody wears a U.S. military uniform, whether active duty, reserves, or NG - that didn't CHOOSE to do so, having all the knowledge and information available to them at the time they made their decision.



+1

Deserter = Traitor
Link Posted: 1/9/2005 12:38:42 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/9/2005 12:39:28 PM EDT by The_Neutral_Observer]
There isn't a draft.  Noone drafted anybody who is in the military.  You make your choices and take your chances.

There is no way 5,000 plus current members of the military deserted to Canada in the past three years.  Not even the French Foreign Legion has that many deserters, and they have the worst track record on the planet with desertion.
Link Posted: 1/9/2005 12:40:53 PM EDT
I doubt we have that many deserters.

Deserters are like any other traitor: better dangling by their necks.
Top Top