posted on Jun, 25 2006 @ 10:13 PM
No, he could best serve his men best by leading them in a dangerous environment and ensuring they undertake their duties in a lawful manner. Oh, but
then again, apparently you don't have to apply this logic of what is best for your men because by defining what you believe is right, you transcend
allegiances to man and institution. So at the end of the day the interests of his men don't matter, do they?
Lt Watada joined the military when Iraq was on the cards. His time to go comes up, and then he starts getting moral objections? Sorry, as has
been discussed in the already substantial thread about the Lieutenant, his stand appears to be self-centred more than anything else. He does not
become an accomplice to an illegal act simply by going to Iraq. In fact, international law demands that occupying forces provide security forces. By
not going, he is actually going against international law. As he wasn't part of the actual invasion force, he really has nothing to worry about (not
that I think those of us who were part of the invasion have anything to worry about either). The only thing he would have to worry about if he went is
his personal safety, which I think is more the issue than anything else.
And for an open letter, it reads more like a press release. Just my impressions.