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.

 

U.S. Soldiers Flee to Canada to Avoid Service in Iraq

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 09:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk

Originally posted by Damned
Sorry, but I don't call that brave. I call it stupid.


Be thankful you have stupid people to protect you while you hide behind your locked doors.

There are a lot more "stupid" people, even on this board, people that still carry the scars of their "stupidity" but at least they didn't cut and run like a scared little girl when asked to do the job they hired on to do. The people broke a Solemnly sworn Oath and if you cant understand what that means then I cant explain it to you.

If they were drafted they MIGHT have something to whine about if they joined and then they ran, then they are a lying coward


It's stupid to fight a senseless war, period. And this one is senseless. As I said, people are dying for absolutely no reason. There's no honor in that. They're not heroes, but menaces to the country we occupy. Yes, I agree with you that, if they joined after the Iraq war started, then they should've known they'd be going there. Some soldiers have actually gone to Iraq and then decided that they're really not doing the right thing.

But I'm definitely not hiding behind locked doors. I never have and never will. There was no threat to America. I wasn't threatened by Iraq on 9/11, nor am I threatened by them now. The only people who are threatened by Iraq, are those who occupy it now.
Oaths? Give me a break. They mean diddly squat to most people. Look at all the lying judges and lawyers, not to mention politicians.


Let's take a look at the oath, shall we?


I, _________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.


It says they'll support and defend the Constitution against ALL ENEMIES. Well, in this case, many people think the enemy of the Constitution is our own gov't. That presents a problem, doesn't it?

[edit on 12-1-2005 by Damned]




posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 10:19 AM
link   
I say good luck to those soldiers who didn't want to kill for the better of bush and wish even more luck to those who feel they have to. I have loved ones on both sides of the fence.



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 10:29 AM
link   
I feel they should run here to Canada 2.

Let's look at it from their point of view.......

Being "Poor" in some isolated community, with not much hope for a good future (even in the USA) (and as one person noted: in WW2 they all had jobs as "lawyers, bus drivers etc.)....so what do these younge do today? They join the Army and hope for a brighter future, to learn, travel and make a bit of money at the same time. But to go to a "illigal" war, i would say c'ya 2, but to fight a war for "true freedom" and a Army taking over other "free" countries, that would be ok, but to fight this "crazy" war is not the way to go...unless y'r liking 6' under. Not to mention all the complaints from soldiers when they do get "torn apart" and we don't help them enough to get there life back in order, when they are home.

So let's stop pretending this war are like the others...its' NOT, and we need to get out now....and that includes the soldiers.

Your Canadian friend (forever),
Sven



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 10:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Damned
Oaths? Give me a break. They mean diddly squat to most people.


Not most, only the dishonarable ones be they Judge or Coward



It says they'll support and defend the Constitution against ALL ENEMIES. Well, in this case, many people think the enemy of the Constitution is our own gov't. That presents a problem, doesn't it?

[edit on 12-1-2005 by Damned]


How are they defending it by running away? If they believe that this government is the enemy shouldnt they stay and fight? Isnt that what they "Promised" to do? Oh yeah I forgot and Oath means nothing. I am not a Bush supporter (Libertarian) and truly fear some of the things I see happening, but lets be honest here if they were defending the country from Bush they would stay and have their voices heard. I could respect that.

The reason they are running away is not to "defend the country from enimies" but to save their lying, Oath breaking, cowardly hide from having to FACE up to that OATH.

BTW how can one speak of honor then claim an Oath means nothing? It doesnt matter if EVERYONE else breaks theirs.

Honor is doing the right thing even if no one will ever know it



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 10:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk
How are they defending it by running away? If they believe that this government is the enemy shouldnt they stay and fight? Isnt that what they "Promised" to do? Oh yeah I forgot and Oath means nothing. I am not a Bush supporter (Libertarian) and truly fear some of the things I see happening, but lets be honest here if they were defending the country from Bush they would stay and have their voices heard. I could respect that.

If they stay, they go to prison for refusal to fight in Iraq. How is that of any help? Besides, you can't wage war on our gov't until a majority of the citizens feel strongly enough to do so.


BTW how can one speak of honor then claim an Oath means nothing? It doesnt matter if EVERYONE else breaks theirs.

When the oath is given to and enforced by a gov't that doesn't uphold our Constitution, that oath is null and void, IMO.


Honor is doing the right thing even if no one will ever know it

Sometimes the right thing is abandoning the wrong thing.



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Damned
If they stay, they go to prison for refusal to fight in Iraq. How is that of any help? Besides, you can't wage war on our gov't until a majority of the citizens feel strongly enough to do so.


You answered your own question here. If the war is illegal, as you claim and I believe as well, he will be imprisoned illegally. This would be a focal point for the people. No one tollerates someone being imprisoned in this manner. So by staying and doing his duty, although in jail, he is fulfilling his obligation. History will bear it out.



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 12:04 PM
link   
I don't know about you, but given the choice between prison and Canada, I'll take Canada any day. Sorry, but being a martyr for America isn't beneficial. Most likely, you'd just rot in a cell while no one does a thing. No one is doing anything now. What makes you think that's going to miraculously change if your in jail? Unless half the military goes AWOL, and we have a real mutiny in America, nobody is going to do anything except lock them up. You're not quite in touch with reality, if you think different.

[edit on 12-1-2005 by Damned]



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 12:08 PM
link   
moral dilemma
this is a really tough dilemma.
first,
i understand the meaning of duty when you join the army. you have to be aware of the sitation you are putting yourself in. a soldier is trained to kill, and kill he will. if you have a problem with that, do not go in to the army! and if you know your country is goin to war, then it means you are soon going to war too. soon all the knowledge of killing and survival will be put to the ultimate test. that is "what they are trained and payed for". it is a TEAM. you have a group of people you know, and that is your TEAM. you are in this togather, and if you fail your team will also fail. you are not putting your life in danger but also the entire team. that is how army thinks. and it is the correct thinking. if i was a general i wouldnt want people deserting my army.
that is the view of the army, the military collective in which a single soldier play a very little role. he is just a small piece in a bigger machinery.

second,
i also understand the situation of a single soldier. when he was trained for war, he didnt know what exactly that means. now, when he has seen it and tasted it, he has the right to choose, if he really want to do that for "his job". but you never know that, unless you are face to face with the enemy in REAL combat. that is the real test of your skills and abilites as a soldier. and here the line is drawn. some people are born soldiers, and face it, they are very good killers and that is what they do best. but some people are not born soldiers, they are just "trying to get a job", if you know what i mean. keeping his family safe and not hungry at home. and a soldier knows nothing about what is going on, he knows less then you and me here, in a peacefull world, where information is not a luxury you can not afford.

now army gets split into:
- the one that fights for his country
- the one that fights for himself
the first ones are the heroes and the "real patriots", and will eventually die for their country.
the second ones will sooner or later realize that they dont want to fight other peoples wars.



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
moral dilemma
this is a really tough dilemma.
first,
i understand the meaning of duty when you join the army. you have to be aware of the sitation you are putting yourself in. a soldier is trained to kill, and kill he will. if you have a problem with that, do not go in to the army! and if you know your country is goin to war, then it means you are soon going to war too. soon all the knowledge of killing and survival will be put to the ultimate test. that is "what they are trained and paid for". it is a TEAM. you have a group of people you know, and that is your TEAM. you are in this togather, and if you fail your team will also fail. you are not putting your life in danger but also the entire team. that is how army thinks. and it is the correct thinking. if i was a general i wouldn't want people deserting my army.
that is the view of the army, the military collective in which a single soldier play a very little role. he is just a small piece in a bigger machinery.

That's where principle comes into play. When you're "team" decides it's right to do something wrong, do you still join them? It's kind of like the movie "Casualties Of War." If your squad starts raping and killing people for no reason, there's a problem. That's pretty much what's happening, IMO. We've invaded a country unnecessarily. So, if the leaders don't make the right calls (or they just go f'ing crazy, as ours have) it's up to you to decide whether you can just disregard your most basic morals. Some people can't. Others just won't. It's not that they don't want to fight others wars. It's that they don't want to fight unjustified wars.


[edit on 12-1-2005 by Damned]



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Damned
That's where principle comes into play. When you're "team" decides it's right to do something wrong, do you still join them? It's kind of like the movie "Casualties Of War." If your squad starts raping and killing people for no reason, there's a problem. That's pretty much what's happening, IMO. We've invaded a country unnecessarily. So, if the leaders don't make the right calls (or they just go f'ing crazy, as ours have) it's up to you to decide whether you can just disregard your most basic morals. Some people can't. Others just won't. It's not that they don't want to fight others wars. It's that they don't want to fight unjustified wars.

yes i agree with you.
in every war, it always comes to this "point", where war goes wild. i have seen that here, in ex-yugoslavija, people that were once brothers, now killing each other, raping women, killing children, just because of pure rage and vengance. nother else. in every war, every man comes to a point where he realizes what is REALLY going on, and as you said, principles come into play.
i have never seen a "fair war", where everything went "as planned", and smoothly. things always get more and more complicated.
every time.
that is the face of war.
gets dirtier every time.



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
Its a pitty that your government would harbor deserters from a government that it owes a great deal to. Shame shame.


the mores and values of 'countries'(a mostly meaningless archaic term) are constantly in flux. that is why a good set of values is set into virtual stone, in the form of constitutions and charters of rights.
there is no shame in adhereing to the traditional values set out by wise forefathers.
there IS shame, in allowing the flavour of the media minute to guide your reactive mind into action over your reasoning mind.
canada believes in the rights of the INDIVIDUAL and will not be easily coerced by 'big brother' america into not giving equal consideration to refugees of state sponsored terrorism from wherever they originate. it is in the canadian declaration of rights. canadians respect the rules they made for themselves.
this soldier is informed by his charters and constitutions, that he has the RIGHT and DUTY to DISOBEY ORDERS that are illegal. he is not a coward, but a he is a true patriot. sad that patriots must flee your 'great' country.

i just read on that libertyforum thread, a soldier talking about how they were there fighting so that iraqis could 'choose' to shop at walmart or eat at mcdonald's, and he was calling his debate adversary's 'brainwashed'. that in a nutshell, is the american tradgedy ...corporate, blood and oil-soaked, monopoly facism, disguised as 'freedom' and 'capitalism'.

check where all your products from 'freedom loving' walmart and mcdonald's are made. i'll save you the trouble, ....they're 'made in china'.



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Damned
It's kind of like the movie "Casualties Of War." If your squad starts raping and killing people for no reason, there's a problem.


OK you are right on this one.

So lets see what did the hero do?

1. Run crying to another country?

2.Stay and fulfill his oath AND bring those actions to light?

He was man enough to stop the actions and answer the consequences for his actions.

Why?

Because he wasn't a lying Coward using whatever excuse he could come up with to cover his cowardince.

IF he really didnt believe in the way things were being done he would take steps to correct them not run and hide behind his mamas skirts



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk
IF he really didnt believe in the way things were being done he would take steps to correct them not run and hide behind his mamas skirts


You calling Canada "mama"?


BTW, jail isn't that bad. I work in one, I know.



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
BTW, jail isn't that bad. I work in one, I know.


Its an excuse.

Instead of saying I joined the Army to train for a job or go to school and never dreamed I would really have to fight someone so I quit.

They play this REAL Patriot BS. If the TRULY disagreed and was trying to be a REAL Patriot they would stay and have their voices heard even if it ment prision.

A REAL PATRIOT has to give his life for others freedoms sometimes, be it Battlefield OR Prision.

Unless of course you are just a coward then go ahead and run



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk
OK you are right on this one.
So lets see what did the hero do?

1. Run crying to another country?

2.Stay and fulfill his oath AND bring those actions to light?

He was man enough to stop the actions and answer the consequences for his actions.

Why?

Because he wasn't a lying Coward using whatever excuse he could come up with to cover his cowardince.

IF he really didnt believe in the way things were being done he would take steps to correct them not run and hide behind his mamas skirts

OK
as i said before, its a real moral dilemma.
i partly agree with you, since running away never solves anything. it is just a "pause" and sooner or later something will bring you to justice. if i saw my teamate raping and killing without any "moral judgement" i would fulfill my oath and make sure HE PAYS for what he has done! but that was your teammates call, he wanted to rape and slaughter.

but what do you do, when the MAIN MAN in charge, the field general orders you to rape? what then? who you going to report that? the colonel? well i guess he probably knows. well, if the general is on this, i do not want to be part of it!
that is how i look at it.
when the sickness of war gets into a brain of a leader, that is supposed to take care of his troops and their morale and level of "mental stability", then a soldier starts asking himself: "hey wait a minute! why am i following HIS orders? he must be NUTZ for asking me to do that?!?"
then things get really complicated.



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
OK
as i said before, its a real moral dilemma.
i partly agree with you, since running away never solves anything. it is just a "pause" and sooner or later something will bring you to justice.


Running is just running. If my Squad mates tried that crap around me it would be stopped and reported. By me.



but what do you do, when the MAIN MAN in charge, the field general orders you to rape?


PLEASE
The generals are ORDERING THEM TO RAPE????


Give me a break



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk


but what do you do, when the MAIN MAN in charge, the field general orders you to rape?


PLEASE
The generals are ORDERING THEM TO RAPE????


Give me a break

why you laughing?
as if it was the first time a general gave that kind of order!



[edit on 12-1-2005 by Souljah]



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 12:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
why you laughing?
as if it was the first time a general gave that kind of order!


Where is ANY proof, a Memo, a Speech, ANYTHING, where they have been ORDERED to rape?

Jihadunspun doesnt count


As a matter of fact it seems that those CAUGHT doing these things are being persucuted.

Can you say the same about the "insurgents" killing women/aid workers/etc?

[edit on 12-1-2005 by Amuk]



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 01:00 PM
link   
1) Lets all just take a step back for a minute because we are talking about Americans, and at the root of it, people.

2) Having taken the oath myself under Clinton, I know it's easy to make a choice with little understanding of the true political culture and climate (which I'd say is true of most Americans recently).

3) Staying and fighting a war, and staying and fighting injustice in your own country take a certain amount of heat, which some are not able to give because they might not have the endurance to weather either of those storms.

4) As a proud American, I am moreover a proud father and would abandon my country in lieu of my family’s safety if push came to shove.

Am I a coward? No. We in America seem a little too hasty to spill blood of people we rarely understand, and for reasons that are few and far between if they get much justification at all.

How many military incursions have we waged with little to no media fanfare?

Conclusion:

Don't be so hasty to label others as cowards, because that is a stronger word than its usage might tell.

Some people (like me) are road weary of the political BS and the ever-present faux persona put out there by the majority of people (which worsens in politics).



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 01:02 PM
link   
ok,
i think we misunderstood each other.
i was talking about torture and treatment in prisons,
but that "torture order" also came from high positions in control.
what was going on in there, better you and i never know.
"rape" is a very mild word for that.

orders like that get a soldier confused:
"arent we supposed to fight people that do things like that?"



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join