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: 8
0
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 08:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by JoeDoaks

parrhesia I believe you are mistaken on the refuge to non-draftee soldiers. I don't fully understand Canadian law on this but I know of no case where an American deserter was sent back.


I don't think they have ever accepted someone who has volunteered their service, which is further indicated by the debate going on regarding this at the moment.

I think the refugee claim being made by Hinzman is ridiculous, actually. There millions more people in the world who need a place of refuge more than he does.

He's based his claim on two things:

1)He says the war in Iraq is illegal and that he shouldn't be compelled to serve in what he refers to as a criminal conflict.

2)He also told the board that he refused to serve because he might have had to commit atrocities against the Iraqi people.

Neither of which require him to leave the USA to avoid.




posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 08:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
The authority of the command is not in question. If you refuse to follow an order, that is insubordination.

Yes, the authority of the command is definitely in question. This is what you don't understand, apparently. The use of the military is being abused. What you describe is unconditional command, such as the Nazis followed. I'm of the belief that, if those people weren't idiots who think an oath is more important than morals, there wouldn't have been a holocaust.
Don't you ever wonder why the Nazis didn't use their brains and think, "Hey, genocide isn't right! We should rebel against this action!"
They couldn't have all really thought they were doing the right thing.
Someone has to draw the line. If people follow insane or evil leaders blindly, no one will stop the unjust domination of the world, should someone decide that it's their god given right. America seems to think that they are the predestined super power that should govern the entire earth. They're wrong. I'd like them to realize this and change the policy, before it's too late. I'm not going to help them obtain their goal, and I surely hope our military will come to their senses and abandon this insanity. I think jprophet420 is correct. It's their duty not to fight this war. Someone has to be the voice of reason, since our gov't isn't.


Originally posted by parrhesia
I think the refugee claim being made by Hinzman is ridiculous, actually. There millions more people in the world who need a place of refuge more than he does.

He's based his claim on two things:

1)He says the war in Iraq is illegal and that he shouldn't be compelled to serve in what he refers to as a criminal conflict.

2)He also told the board that he refused to serve because he might have had to commit atrocities against the Iraqi people.

Neither of which require him to leave the USA to avoid.

Do you have any idea what's involved in convincing the US gov that you shouldn't have to fight their illegal war? When you try to fight the gov't, you usually end up being railroaded. You have very little chance of winning against them, unless you have a large class action suit. In short, they make the rules, and you're supposed to follow them, even if they are criminal.

[edit on 13-1-2005 by Damned]



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 09:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Damned
Do you have any idea what's involved in convincing the US gov that you shouldn't have to fight their illegal war? When you try to fight the gov't, you usually end up being railroaded. You have very little chance of winning against them, unless you have a large class action suit. In short, they make the rules, and you're supposed to follow them, even if they are criminal.


That may be so, but I still disagree with the way he's gone about this. As I've said before, I'm not questioning the moral behind his decision, I can understand . But I think running away is the wrong way to deal with the situation. If he really, truly believes the war is illegal why not stand up and say so and fight so you don't have to run. Fact is, he didn't even bother to fight it, he just ran and seems to expect Canada to save his a$$.

His claims for refugee status in Canada don't float in my opinion, as he didn't have to leave the country to avoid doing those things. Refugee status could be given to someone who needs it more and who really needs refuge, someone with far more need for it than him.



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 09:25 AM
link   
As someone who has been to court a few times, I sure wouldn't place any merit in that system. If you're going against the system, it's going to work against you, and you will lose. Knowing this, I wouldn't place my future in the hands of the US gov't either. You're liable not to have much of a future. Most people know this, so they never challenge the gov't.



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 09:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by parrhesia
That may be so, but I still disagree with the way he's gone about this. As I've said before, I'm not questioning the moral behind his decision, I can understand . But I think running away is the wrong way to deal with the situation. If he really, truly believes the war is illegal why not stand up and say so and fight so you don't have to run. Fact is, he didn't even bother to fight it, he just ran and seems to expect Canada to save his a$$.

My sentiments exactly. Some here have been busted while breaking laws, and think that this makes them an international lawyer. The courtrooms are full of punks like them.

As I have stated, a man can have a change of heart, and decide that he does not want to continue. As long as he is man enough to stand up and face the consquences of his decision, I will continue to respect him, even though I may disagree with him.

When he starts to run away and blame "the man" for stacking the deck, then he shows his true colors: Yellow.



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
My sentiments exactly. Some here have been busted while breaking laws, and think that this makes them an international lawyer. The courtrooms are full of punks like them.

Becky, you have no idea what I've been to court for. I don't claim to be an international lawyer, but I will definitely say that, if you've never experienced the system, you don't know anything about it. When you decide to challenge any policy of the US gov't, you are their enemy. They'll do anything they can to make sure you pay, even if you're not guilty of a crime. If you're a burden to them, or if they feel that you're wasting their precious time (which we pay for, BTW), they'll make you pay dearly. I've heard it's even worse, in military courts. Accusing the US gov't of high corruption always goes over wonderfully, I'm sure.



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 12:25 PM
link   
the man does stack the deck, stevie wonder can see that. i hope im not going against rules by not posting a link to proof and leaving my response short but sweet, but come on...



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by JoeDoaks
Amuk
you are OUT OF LINE

Then you are a liar too.


As MOD you are VERY out of line.





Oaths don't mean #, IMO.



You left out the part where he said an Oath "didn't mean #" to him. I didn't call him names I merely stated a fact, if your word means nothing to you and you break it at whim you are a LIAR. HE HIMSELF said his word meant nothing, not me.


What is an oath anyway? It is a verbal promise or agreement.


And if they "dont mean #" to you what does that make you?


I didn't accuse him of ANYTHING, didn't call him a coward, traitor, etc; and make no assumptions about his character OTHER THAN WHAT HE STATED ABOUT HIMSELF.

HE stated he was a liar I merely pointed out what he was stating.
A liar is someone who breaks their word, as in someone to whom "Oaths dont mean # IMO"


Where was I out of line?



[edit on 13-1-2005 by Amuk]



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk
You left out the part where he said an Oath "didn't mean #" to him. I didn't call him names I merely stated a fact, if your word means nothing to you and you break it at whim you are a LIAR. HE HIMSELF said his word meant nothing, not me.

No, I didn't. I said oaths don't mean # (anything) to me. I never said my word means nothing, nor did I say that promises mean nothing.
I'm talking about promises written by someone other than the person who is going to adhere to the promise. It's bull#. (BS)



What is an oath anyway? It is a verbal promise or agreement.

Yes, a verbal agreement written by someone else, for you to read, as if it were your own statement.
Again, bull#! (BS)


Here, let me write your promise for you, then you can read it and act like it was your idea, ok? Gimme a #ing break!


ATS should replace profanity with a substitute word, or something. It looks stupid with nothing in place of the word. In some cases, sentences don't even make sense.


[edit on 13-1-2005 by Damned]



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Damned
I'm talking about promises written by someone other than the person who is going to adhere to the promise. It's bull#.


So a contract is bull# unless YOU write it? In that case no contract can ever bind anyone because BOTH sides cant type it. They signed on the line didn't they? Where they held at gun point? Were they rounded up in the middle of the night and brought to Iraq?

NO

They had to go to a recruitment station, sign there, take tests, sign there, go to Boot camp, sign there, Take Oath, etc. They had to voluntarily do this at every step.


What is an oath anyway? It is a verbal promise or agreement.




Yes, a verbal agreement written by someone else, for you to read, as if it were your own statement.
Again, bull#!



NO it is a statement for you to SIGN therby agreeing to the terms NOONE can just write a contract you MUST agree with it




Here, let me write your promise for you, then you can read it and act like it was your idea, ok? Gimme a #ing break!



If I agree to your terms sign the contract you wrote and then break it not only am I a liar I am legally liable.

If I sign it it becomes my statement, even in a court of law


[edit on 13-1-2005 by Amuk]



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
Well, I already live in the USA and love it here. Even though my current government is questionable at best, its still the safest, cleanest place on earth. I worry about nothing. I have the freedom to do anything I want so long as it does not infringe on others freedoms. I can say anything I want and go anywhere I please.

So I look north and see our Canadian neighbors. Very similar to the US in many ways, but not actually the US. Canada simply does not have the security or resources that I have here. Canada is USA light. Like a lesser facsimile.

-snip-

I would rather serve my country in a war I do not support than move away to a country as a criminal that is second place to the one I already have.

Now, I don’t know the numbers, but I would be willing to bet for every American who has moved to Canada, I bet 10 Canadians moved to the USA. Can somebody verify what the numbers really are?

Anyways, the US will shake the current administration eventually, as it has many times in the past, and become the great nation it really is...again. And during these ups and downs, I can say that I will never sell myself to a "B" version of my country to avoid fighting for it.


Skippy, Skippy, Skippy...Many around the world have the impression that all Americans are like you - uninformed. Me, I'd just say you don't get out much do you, even though you've visited Canada. Cleanest, safest place on earth? Who are you kidding? Not even Canada, which is MAGNIFIQUE, merci beaucoup, can claim that. You'd probably have to look to Finland or one of those Nordic countries for that claim to fame.

As for Canadians moving south. You're right. With your population there's lots of economic opportunity there. That's why they move, not because its cleaner, safer and more free. If they had to choose, ask any one of them if they would ever consider giving up their Canadian citizenship and dollars to doughnuts the answer would be NEVER. The U.S. has lots of problems and wonderful qualities, so does Canada. But never ever presume to say that the U.S. is better because you're just fooling yourself, it just that its your country and you love it.

I am eligible for U.S. residency because my Dad is a dual citizen. I even made application to go, but you know what, since Bush and the war, and his re-election, I've changed my mind. I love to visit, have tons of friends and family there, but the politics in the U.S. these days make me appreciate Canada so much more, and I wouldn't trade it for anything because its my country. I don't say its better,(although we do have healthcare for everyone and an election system that actually works and is the same whether your live in Iqualit, Nunavut, Halifax, N.S., Toronto, Ont., Moose Jaw, Sask., or Prince Rupert B.C.). Its just mine and I love it.

As for that part about freedom...I guess so, as long as you don't tell lawyer jokes at the 1st District Court in Hemstead, N.Y.!


www.abovetopsecret.com...

BTW-Jeremy Hinzman etc. will not be permitted to stay in Canada. One of the principles of admission as a refugee is that your life would be in danger if you went back to where you came from. Being sent back will mean a a court marshal and prison sentence for sure, but not capital punishment, so they won't be granted refugee status. These guys should have known when they signed up for the 82nd airborne that the U.S. is, more often than not, in a conflict somewhere in the world and that the chances of having to go to war or an invasion at some point are pretty high. If they weren't prepared for that, they shouldn't have joined up.

[edit on 13/1/05 by AlwaysLearning]

[edit on 13/1/05 by AlwaysLearning]



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 03:15 PM
link   
It's a formality. It looks good, and it may appear, to anyone watching, that you're really dedicated to your cause, but it's BS. You still merely read someone else's prefabricated statement. If you join the services, that alone should imply that you're willing to die for your country. No stupid oath is necessary, IMO. Talk is cheap. We all know this.

[edit on 13-1-2005 by Damned]



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Damned
Talk is cheap. We all know this.


Just ask the guys running to Canada



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk

Just ask the guys running to Canada




You stole my words!!




posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 03:22 PM
link   
Why does the president take an oath? Only because it looks good to the audience, IMO. It's just a ceremonious thing, really. What would be the point of taking an oath if nobody was there to see and hear you do it?



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 03:32 PM
link   
To all those America bashers:

Its sad to see how much the rest of the world stereotypes America. I live here I am satisfied, end of story. I don't care if every countries roads are paved with gold, or borders are built with steal walls. America is were I was born and America is the place i grown to know and love.

I've been out side of the country, including Canada. All I have to say is there is no place like home ...

Go ahead, try and tell people that america sucks, if your that arrogant I want nothing to do with wear you live and just proves that the united states is doing the right thing.

good bless America, may my fellow Americans reject the arrogance and ignorance of others.



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 03:47 PM
link   
They're not bashing America. They're bashing the gov't (and supporters of the gov't) that no longer adheres to the original set of rules that Americans created as a failsafe plan to avoid some of the things that are now taking place. How you can stand idle and/or actually voice support for such atrocity is beyond me. This country that you know and love is being ruined by that arrogance.



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Damned
They're not bashing America. They're bashing the gov't (and supporters of the gov't) that no longer adheres to the original set of rules that Americans created as a failsafe plan to avoid some of the things that are now taking place. How you can stand idle and/or actually voice support for such atrocity is beyond me. This country that you know and love is being ruined by that arrogance.


then your bashing half of America, we support our current government, may the re-election of bush prove that.


[edit on 13-1-2005 by iksmodnad]



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by iksmodnad
then your bashing half of America, we support our current government, may the re-election of bush prove that.


I would be careful about that WE thing. Just because I dont support liars and cowards running to Canada doesnt mean I support the ones that run the Government

*never mind you edited it*

[edit on 13-1-2005 by Amuk]



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 04:06 PM
link   
If i cannot say WE than what do I say. It just shows the disgusting division of beliefs on how the government should be run in the USA.

Sorry if saying WE the offended anyone in the "united" states



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join