It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Deserter: Iraq war is 'illegal'

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 9 2004 @ 10:07 PM
link   
You can be put to death for falling asleep on post in a combat zone. It is highly unlikely that he will be sentenced to death, but it would serve him right.




posted on Dec, 9 2004 @ 10:21 PM
link   
So is joining up, then deserting, any different than not joining at all?

Is breaking a contract deserving of a death sentence?
Because that's all it is, breaking a contract.
Business's do it all the time.

If you are of age and fit to serve, and you haven't, then there is NO way you can judge this guys actions.

Should people who don't join up be shot too?
Aren't they cowards for not serving?

Please explain to me how you can be so calouse as to take someones life for breaking a contract.

And having said that I don't believe any of you would really be able to pull that trigger by choice. Maybe if you we're ordered you could hide behind the "I was ordered" excuse, but really I don't see it.

Hands up how many here have killed a person face to face, someone of your own blood. Ever met anybody who has?
Even Cops have bad emotional problems after killing a suspect. Some never get over it.
Killing someone is not as easy as you think.
What moral right have you got to take someones life?
What crime is commited by desertion? Cowardnes is NOT a crime.
If you are willing to take this guys life then IMHO you don't have much respect for life. Think with your brains, not your emotions!



posted on Dec, 9 2004 @ 10:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK
You guys are a trip, you would really kill a man for deserting?

Its definitely somethign that must be considered.


What about his family? They didn't desert. But they will also sufer for their loss.

All good reasons to not kill him, certainly.
Would you have your brother shot if he deserted? Your Sister, mother, father?
All for an illegal war that shouldn't have happened in the first place?
Did you think about that?


Would you have your brother shot if he deserted? Your Sister, mother, father?

None of them would do this, so its not an answerable question. Besides, this is law and ethics, not personal feelings. This man has commited a crime, one that is punishable by death, and for good reason. However, the US doesn't normalyl execute people for desertion. Heck, the Brits used to execute people on the field for cowardice. Of course, there isa difference, very slight, between cowardice/desertion on the field, and doing so at home. The problem with cowardice/desertion on the field is that it can cause entire units, even battle lines, to desert en mass, hence the harshness and finality of the punishment.

All for an illegal war that shouldn't have happened in the first place?

The iraq war was not illegal and the US should be there, so this is a strange line to take.



posted on Dec, 9 2004 @ 10:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by SourGrapes
[

No, I wouldn't kill him for deserting. I don't believe he should be put to death. I also don't believe I'd be able to put him to death. I don't believe I could kill anybody (out of self defense), which is one reason I'm not fit to be a soldier. Funny, I know this why didn't he?


So you're not willing to go and kill for your country, but when someone else does then changes their mind that's bad?

Maybe he didn't know until after he joined, what diff does it make when you come to the decision that you can't kill?
What crime did he commit in your eyes, other than making a bad decision?
People make them all the time, should we all be punished?



posted on Dec, 9 2004 @ 10:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan

The iraq war was not illegal and the US should be there, so this is a strange line to take.


Well many ppl with more credibilty in my eyes than you say it is.
So what's so strange about it?



posted on Dec, 9 2004 @ 10:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by SourGrapes
[

No, I wouldn't kill him for deserting. I don't believe he should be put to death. I also don't believe I'd be able to put him to death. I don't believe I could kill anybody (out of self defense), which is one reason I'm not fit to be a soldier. Funny, I know this why didn't he?


So you're not willing to go and kill for your country, but when someone else does then changes their mind that's bad?


Actually, I'm not selfish enough to join for all the 'wrong reasons'. He was! He was TRAINED to KILL! Again, HE WAS TRAINED TO KILL!!!!!!! He could have 'changed his mind' at the recruiters office, he could have 'changed his mind' at bootcamp. He could have 'changed his mind' at MOS school. Heck, so many opportunities to 'change his mind' prior to receiving his big bonuses and other benefits! He is selfish, he thought he could get away w/joining in one of the most dangerous positions so he could reap the benefits of such. He just wasn't willing to pay the price for it.




Maybe he didn't know until after he joined, what diff does it make when you come to the decision that you can't kill?
What crime did he commit in your eyes, other than making a bad decision?
People make them all the time, should we all be punished?


What about a cop? When is a cop allowed to 'change his mind'? When is a fireman allowed to 'change his mind'?



[edit on 9-12-2004 by SourGrapes]



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 12:33 AM
link   
You're trying to compare apples to oranges.

To really say that what this guy did was wrong or right we would have to debate the whole issue of having a military and using it to benefit the ruling elites in the first place.
So, do they shoot firemen for desertion?lol

[edit on 10/12/2004 by ANOK]



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 12:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK
You're trying to compare apples to oranges.


'Apples to oranges' is the difference of someone who backs out of a contract 'before' or 'after' that person signs on the dotted line.

You're giving a 'before' view and wanting the 'after' argument. Totally different.
Apples = changes mind after learning what his job will be but before commiting to it!
Oranges = accepting what his job will be, then TRAINS for it, reeps benefits of it ,then changes mind when he is called to DO IT



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 12:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK
You're trying to compare apples to oranges.

To really say that what this guy did was wrong or right we would have to debate the whole issue of having a military and using it to benefit the ruling elites in the first place.
So, do they shoot firemen for desertion?lol

[edit on 10/12/2004 by ANOK]


I think you are confused.

If you don't like to fight fires, don't become a fire fighter. If you don't like to fight in war, don't become a paratrooper! Actually, pretty simple.



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 01:11 AM
link   
Actually, all this debate is pointless. Desertion is a crime. If Canada hasn't lost its moral compass completely, he will be returned and the Army will try him and sentence him. Otherwise, Canada can keep him and our diplomatic relationship with Canada will suffer, not to mention the boycott.

[edit on 04/12/10 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 01:30 AM
link   
So as far as i can see the so call patriotic Americans(well thats what they are trying to sound like,nothing wrong with that so long as your not blindly led)are willing to put to death one of their own people because he did`nt have the stomach to invade a country that had nothing to do with 9/11.
And put him to death because he as a deserter in the war with IRAQ!! put the lives of his fellow soldiers at risk?.
If all the soldiers slowly backed out of IRAQ and did the same thing as this guy,that would be a step in the right direction,then maybe your politicians would make wiser decisions in the future,don't forget your leaders are your employee`s and they shoveled huge amounts of bs to the world about Iraq,how would you feel enlisting to fight a noble an just fight suddenly to find out you have been lied to,kinda takes the wind out of your sail, you guys that want to murder this guy send your kids there if you think its a noble and just fight,i was sucked in as well at the start of this but WHERE`S THE WMD?????? that your government fed the world,you guys would`nt need a draft if it was a just cause!you would have alot braver soldiers who believed in the fight.
I know some of what i`ve written is impractical but you guys should be demanding better from your government,they are the ones who have made this situation and put all your soldiers lives at risk not this one little guy,let him come to aussie land we`ll have him i`ll buy him a beer and call him mate if he buys me 1 in return,he`s not a murderer rapist theif,in my books that makes him pretty decent



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 01:34 AM
link   
I have only one thing to say to you gps777. Mind your own business.

The crime of desertion is universally recognized. In a regime like Saddam's he would be tortured to death.

[edit on 04/12/10 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 01:36 AM
link   
Granted, the verdict is still out on this one, but I'll add something to this.
Under the 'Laws of War' a soldier has a duty to refuse to commit what could be considered a war crime.


Preventing War Crimes

War Crimes

ANY Violation of the Law of War Committed by ANY Person During an Armed Conflict (GC, Art. 146; GPW, Art. 129; GPS, Art. 49; FM 27-10, para. 498, 499)


Two Types of War Crimes

Grave Breaches? (GC, Art. 147; GPW, Art. 130; GPS, Art. 50; FM 27-10, para. 502)


Includes Torture, Willfully Depriving a Person of a Trial


Simple Breaches? (FM 27-10, para. 504)


Includes Forcing a POW to Perform Prohibited Labor


Nations Obligation to Suppress War Crimes (GPS, Art. 49; GPW, Art. 129, GC, Art. 146; FM 27-10, para. 506, 507)


...(snip)

Soldiers Duties and Responsibilities


Watch for Evidence of Prior Abuse


Document & Report any Suspicions of Prior Abuse


You MUST Report Violations & Suspected Violations of Laws of War as Serious Incidents.


Responsible for Own Acts or Omissions which Violate Law of War


Must NOT Obey Unlawful Orders


If Soldier Receives Unlawful Order, Soldier Should Try to Prevent the Order From Being Carried Out

...(snip)

source

As to the fact that this particular case concerns a deserter, if I understand this correctly and if ruled in this soldier's favor; he could be granted a conscientious objector status.



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 01:39 AM
link   
Nice cut and paste, Durden. Every serviceman has the obligation to not obey an unlawful order. Even if he feels that he is being given an unlawful order, his options do not include desertion.




As to the fact that this particular case concerns a deserter, if I understand this correctly and if ruled in this soldier's favor; he could be granted a conscientious objector status.



It's way too late for that now.


[edit on 04/12/10 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 01:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Nice cut and paste, Durden.

Why thank you. Is there a complaint you'd like to add?


Every serviceman has the obligation to not obey an unlawful order. Even if he feels that he is being given an unlawful order, his options do not include desertion.

And like I said in my previous post (it's cut and pasted - just for you):


Originally posted by Durden
As to the fact that this particular case concerns a deserter, if I understand this correctly and if ruled in this soldier's favor; he could be granted a conscientious objector status.



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 01:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
It's way too late for that now.

We'll just have to wait and see.


[edit on 10-12-2004 by Durden]



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 01:46 AM
link   
Durden,

I could see where this would apply given the guy was in the position to commit a war crime. He wasn't. He's 'anticipating' a war crime. Heck, if that were the case then everyone could join the service, sign on the dotted line, then once war is in the horizon cry 'war crimes!'



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 01:52 AM
link   
I think what is interesting here is if this is to be considered a war that is known by the soldier to be illegal; consequentially a war crime that is known by the soldier to be such.



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 02:06 AM
link   
huh? I'm not sure I understand your post. Are you saying that if this guy 'believes' the war is illegal then his case should stand and be argued as a 'war crime'?

Did you know that he had the option to request an "Administrative Discharge" all the way up to the day of his deployment? Why didn't he do that? Why desert the military and run from his obligations? (He actually commited a crime by doing so.)


[edit on 10-12-2004 by SourGrapes]



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 02:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by SourGrapes
huh? I'm not sure I understood your post. Are you saying that if this guy 'believes' the war is illegal then his case should stand and be argued as a 'war crime'?

I was saying that if this war is viewed by the soldier to be illegal then the issue is by definition whether it could be considered that the soldier was part of a war crime.


Did you know that he had the option to request an "Administrative Discharge" all the way up to the day of his deployment? Why didn't he do that? Why desert the military and run from his obligations?

That's what this case will have to show. We don't know what information the soldier had prior to joining this war as compared to that which he had at the time of deserting.


[edit on 10-12-2004 by Durden]



new topics




 
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join