posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 05:30 PM
The problem was not so much that he had to serve under a Finnish commander, (possibly legally appointed?) as it was having to fight as a UN-Soldier,
stripped of his congressionally regulated US-uniform (AR670-1) and his US Army ID-card, under a Finnish commander sworn to uphold the UN
So basically he was told, throgh his command by the commander in chief, to commit treason.
Michael chose (after allowing his superiors adequate time to inform him of the legality of their orders, and getting only "because they [UN-uniforms]
look fabulous" !!!) to protect our Constitution from enemies foreign and domestic by showing up for the formation in the only uniform that the
US allows it's soldiers to wear!
This man deserves the honor of his discharge to be restored!
Besides, did anybode else notice, that the US has never since served under the UN again? A couple of times within NATO, yes, but never again under
direct UN command!
I beleive the UN was trying to create a precedent of sorts. Thank [your] God that we still have people like Michael who are willing to stand up!
Several SF troops too... all of whom got honorable discharges though. (one, a NCO, was even asked to resign ...something only allowed to
I don't care who the president was, or is! (I served in the Bush years)
It is the duty of every Fighting Man to question all orders for their legality!
While I might not have realized the legal situation, (had I been in his shoes) there would have been two soldiers supposedly "out of uniform" on
that fateful day, had I had the opportunity to takl things over with him.
[edit on 200939 by Carlthulhu]