Court-Martial Handed Down for Ft. Lewis Lt

[Guest]

We've been through this before.

Military people are willingly under orders, and are not allowed to make policy or decide which wars they will or will not fight.

According to this Seattle Times story, "Watada's statements that 'soldiers can stop the war by refusing to fight' border on violations of a separate military code — mutiny and sedition."

I support this conclusion. If you don't agree with policy, then quit, but don't get on a soapbox and make statements critical of policy - those decisions aren't yours to make.

mh

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[vortexring 0]

I agree with you Mark, however, it leaves a lot of food for thought considering how often soldiers on both sides of the pond are going down this road...

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[rasmack 0]

No argument here. This guy was even a lieutenant...

HF #682, Team Dirty Sanchez #227
“I simply hate, detest, loathe, despise, and abhor redundancy.”
- Not quite Oscar Wilde...

[miked10270 0]

The US Army is SOooo... needing to build a stockade somewhere near Tikrit.

OK. I'm against the continued deployment in Iraq, BUT... I'm a damned sight more against volunteer soldiers saying: "Sorry mate, I don't fancy this particular war!"

Mike.

Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.

Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

[warpedskydiver 0]

I would not want that guy anywhere near me, I will take a reluctant soldier anyday over a volunteer who decides he doen't want to fight "this time"

NP give the damned uniform back, all your pay, the money for your training, apologize to everyone for being a buddy fucker, then take your punishment.

[steveorino 7]

Quote

OK. I'm against the continued deployment in Iraq, BUT... I'm a damned sight more against volunteer soldiers saying: "Sorry mate, I don't fancy this particular war!"

Mike.

Ditto!

steveOrino

[rasmack 0]

Quote

Quote

OK. I'm against the continued deployment in Iraq, BUT... I'm a damned sight more against volunteer soldiers saying: "Sorry mate, I don't fancy this particular war!"

Mike.

Ditto!

Hey! This is SC. We are not supposed to agree on anything. I therefore agree with steveorino while I think that miked10270 is a jerk.

HF #682, Team Dirty Sanchez #227
“I simply hate, detest, loathe, despise, and abhor redundancy.”
- Not quite Oscar Wilde...

[wmw999 2,602]

I'm sorry, but the karmic force of this thread is causing love and agreement to abound.

We must destroy this thread , and bring back the SC we all know and love Somebody (else) is going to have to volunteer to write a PA that is so vile that it gets the thread moved to the Recycle Bin, where the moderators can laugh at it in the future

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[matthewcline 0]

OK Wendy I will help out.

Is this a CHICKENHawk?



I am glad I am not the Platoon Sergeant who has to pick up this guys mess.

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[slug 1]

Quote

I'm sorry, but the karmic force of this thread is causing love and agreement to abound.

We must destroy this thread , and bring back the SC we all know and love Somebody (else) is going to have to volunteer to write a PA that is so vile that it gets the thread moved to the Recycle Bin, where the moderators can laugh at it in the future

Hi W

PA no problemo.

The idiot who started this post needs to go back to H.S. to learn how to read the link in his orig post.

See that wasn't that hard for a PA is SP


"Court-martial recommended for Fort Lewis officer
By Hal Bernton

Seattle Times staff reporter

Lt. Ehren Watada refused to ship out with his unit.


An Army investigator has recommended a court-martial trial for 1st Lt. Ehren Watada, finding "reasonable grounds" that the Fort Lewis-based officer refused to deploy in June with his unit for Iraq, showed contempt toward the political leaders and engaged in unbecoming conduct.

Investigating officer Lt. Col Mark Keith also said that Watada's statements that soldiers can stop the war by refusing to fight border on violations of a separate military code — mutiny and sedition."

I'm not a legal beagle but the way I read the above article the bad guy hasn't been court martialed yet only recommended for the dishonor of the court martial by a Lt Col. Is the LT col like a grand jury? or he the judge and jury.?



R.I.P.

[matthewcline 0]

You can equate it to a Grand Jury.
The Court Marshal will be the Trial.

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[lawrocket 3]

I believe it is the duty of soldiers - especially officers - to independently analyze the orders given to determine the legality of same. If he believes the orders to be illegal, it is his duty not to comply with the orders.

That being said, when you go to the press about it, well, that's a different issue altogether.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[vortexring 0]

So essentially, if he fully believed GW II to be illegal(and they'res plenty of argument here!) he could explain his refusal to participate as compliance with his duties?

It's a good and valid point - but it only works to an extent. Otherwise why would so many soldiers have been convicted in military courts for refusal to soldier in Iraq?

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[slug 1]

Quote

So essentially, if he fully believed GW II to be illegal(and they'res plenty of argument here!) he could explain his refusal to participate as compliance with his duties?

It's a good and valid point - but it only works to an extent. Otherwise why would so many soldiers have been convicted in military courts for refusal to soldier in Iraq?

Not a lawyer

I think he is permited to refuse what he considers a illegal order but then the army gets to decide if he's going to get a spanking and how hard. I assume there's many different ways to refuse the order to deploy.

By the soldier going to the media and making the issue public, he's putting the army in a position where they don't have many options.

IMO he's in deep Doo Doo

R.I.P.

[Channman 2]

> If he believes the orders to be illegal, it is his duty not to comply with the orders.

I must say I agree and it's the duty of others to throw his ass behind bars and strip him of his commission.

Reminds me of a young US Soldier from Conroe Texas I believe, somewhere North of Houston who refused to be deployed under the UN. Made it very clear he would only go with the US flag on his uniform and under US command.

He spoke with the News Media explaining that he gave an oath to the United States not to the United Nations. Don't recall how that ended, but I believe it was without jail time.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

So essentially, if he fully believed GW II to be illegal(and they'res plenty of argument here!) he could explain his refusal to participate as compliance with his duties?

If he's wrong, he'll get spanked. If he's right but doesn't object, it could mean more trouble.

It's a fine line, but I gotta at least hand it to the guy for taking a stand, regardless of my beliefs. It's taking a stand to the press that I disagree with. It's the encouragement to others to think as he does that, to me, is his greatest sin.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[lawrocket 3]

I believe you are speaking of Specialist Michael New. He was given a BCD Special discharge for disobedience of an order back in July, 1996.

I believe New is still duking it out in courts...

Well, New stood for what he believed and he got smacked down.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[vortexring 0]

Yes, it's a fine and worrying line indeed.

I also agree - making the stand he took would have taken perhaps more courage than simply and dumbly complying with orders and going out to Iraq.

But with these opinions it beggars belief why he continued to wear his nations and units and comrades uniform.

Here's a 'similiar' and even more interesting(and disturbing) case which occurred over in the UK:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/03/12/nsas12.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/03/12/ixhome.html

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[bch7773 0]

Quote

I believe it is the duty of soldiers - especially officers - to independently analyze the orders given to determine the legality of same. If he believes the orders to be illegal, it is his duty not to comply with the orders.

I'm really on the fence here.

On one hand, he shouldn't get to get out of the war because he doesn't like it.

On the other hand, forcing soldiers to do whatever their superiors wanted is what Nazi germany did. And it was decided that following orders is not an exceptable excuse for comming crimes, etc.

I guess it really comes down to his motivation... if he is just trying to get out of fighting, he should be court marshalled. if he truly believes it is an unjust war, then i don't know...

MB 3528, RB 1182

[billvon 3,132]

>If he believes the orders to be illegal, it is his duty not to comply with the orders.

I don't really buy that. Paul Tibbetts would not have been exonerated if he had refused to fly that mission on August 6, 1945 - even if he believed that killing hundreds of thousands of civilians in a very horrible way was illegal. Not much difference between that and using chemical weapons on insurgent Kurds, other than scale.

A soldier signs up to fight, and obeys orders. A mercenary negotiates the contract. There's a fine line between the two; you can make a case that a soldier does not have to obey a commander who is clearly insane. But he doesn't have the freedom to decide that after three years a war is suddenly immoral, and then leave. Does this lead to problems? Definitely. But those problems are best dealt with BEFORE a soldier signs up, not later.

[hairyjuan 0]

read this! damn it

we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively


wishers never choose, choosers never wish

[matthewcline 0]

?

I am missing how this has any thing to do with the Officer Violating the Oath he took (to the President, County and Unit and its officers who are appointed over him) and abandoning the men and women he was leading as they headed to the plane to Iraq?

Is this the source of his info that lead him to his decision or is it a supporting document for you?

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[GQ_jumper 4]

I also agree - making the stand he took would have taken perhaps more courage than simply and dumbly complying with orders and going out to Iraq.

Quote

If he's still a luitenant than chances are the Iraq war kicked off before he recieved his commission, therefore he had his chance to quit before he became an officer. He wanted to come into the military to defend his country/fight wars, and now he is backing down on the grounds that the war is illegal. You very well have the right to refuse an unlawful order ie "kill everyone in the house including women and children", according to the Geneva convention and US military regulation you are accountable for your own actions in that situation and may therefore refuse. But refusing to go to Iraq, that is not an unlawful order by any means, many people consider it an illegal war, well guess what, congress approved it, so basically everyone saying this war is illegal is at the same time accusing every soldier that has served there a war criminal. This luitenant is the criminal, nowhere in any oath you take while entering military service do you say you will obey all orders as you see fit. Simply put, this officer is a COWARD, a worthless, pathetic, sorry excuse for a soldier and in the eyes of those of us who live up to our committments the lowest form of life on Earth. People like this cause soldiers to get killed, their actions and negative impact on moral is causing more and more of my borthers in arms to come home in body bags. He should be forced to pay back everything the government WASTED to train him, then improsoned in a deep dark hole where he can be periodically ass-raped until he finally dies a slow painful death and finds his way to hell where his sorry ass can wait for me to get there and have a little chat with him. I despise cowards with every fiber of my being and wish the military would quit trying to deal with these people in a politically correct manner and crush them, they deserve nothing less, you can very well be charged with and punished for acts of cowardice in combat, we need to use that charge a lot more than we do.

Excuse my graphic way of describing what I consider to be punishment, but I have served alongside men like this and they negatively impact our efforts over there and cause casualties. And if there's one thing in this world that can set me off this thread found it.

History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid.
--Dwight D. Eisenhower

• Quote

[hairyjuan 0]

The pioneers of the warless world are the men who refuse to fight 'their' wars. Albert Einstein

Once led this nation into war and the people will forever forget the meaning of tolerance. Woodrow Wilson

The United States is not a land mass, it is a corporation.
My State's 'revised statutes' 4-9-307' Location of Debtor-(h) The United States is located in the Disrict Of Columbia. Your State's 'revised statutes' say the EXACT SAME THING.

28 USC 3002 The term United States means a federal corporation.

"if war terrorizes and terrorism is war. What is a war on terror?

45000 dead Iraqi men, women and children, $100,000 a minute.(what account is it all of coming out of any way?)

Depleted uranium(which the U.S. is using against Iraq) is defined in Title 50 USC Sec, 1241? makes it quite clear that depleted uranium is a WEAPON of MASS DESTRUCTION.


Are YOU also, www.addictedtowar.com

we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively


wishers never choose, choosers never wish

[matthewcline 0]

Come on, string together an original idea and put it here clearly so I can understand you.

You still didn't answer the question nor clear up the previous posts relevance for me.

It is your responsibility to provide the direction for your point, not mine to sift through the dribble and find it.

Moulder is that you?

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!