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.

 

Soldier Refuses To Return To Iraq For Immoral Duty

page: 3
7
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 07:51 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


I'm curious. How would you deal with Terrorists and Dictators. Turn them a blind eye and ignore them? let them go on their merry way doing as they will to their people or to others? What is your answer to the Monsters of this world?




posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 08:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia

Originally posted by sos37

Oh, whatever. Barrel of a gun, my a$$! I guess you missed pictures like these where the Iraqi people were clearly proud to be showing their purple fingers, participating in their first democracy-election.


lol oh please
there's even bush supporters what's your point

why don't you speak of a reporter throwing a shoe a bush
or....insurgents fighting against invaders

Do you even have any idea of the opposition holding a majority opinion in almost evey country on the planet being against the war in Iraq?

and in response you post very well photographed pics of iraqis with purple fingers.

LMAO
what a joke.

Congrats on supporting an illegal war that took so much money out of the pockets of you, your kids and neighbours.

Like they say, there's a sucker born every minute.


The vast opposition you speak of just proves that the vast majority of people will let their emotions cloud their judgment. In your case, you're from one of the most liberal countries that ever existed. No doubt butterflies swirl and little sparkles follow you around everywhere in happy-happy liberal-land.

You conveniently forget that Congress had the exact same intelligence reports in front of them that Bush had and voted to go to war based on that intel.

So those pics are a joke? Voting for the first time was a joke? Was it also a joke after Obama was elected when people were shown with tears in their eyes? The two events are a first for each country - one was the first time they had a say in their leadership and the other a first leader of color was elected. So if one was a joke then why is the other not a joke? The emotions in those pictures are real are they not? Are you saying the emotions of the Iraqi people mean less than those of the people of the U.S.?

Also, if this war is illegal then prove it. It's illegal according to the laws of which land? Ours? How do you figure? And where are the charges for the guilty? Oh that's right - I guess I missed the fact that any senior level government official was taken away in shackles for their part in the great "illegal war".

I'll wait for arrests to ever be made for your "illegal" war. In the meantime ... I'll keep shaking my head at the ignorance you wallow in so freely. :shk:



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 08:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


I'm curious. How would you deal with Terrorists and Dictators. Turn them a blind eye and ignore them? let them go on their merry way doing as they will to their people or to others? What is your answer to the Monsters of this world?
You might want to rethink who the terrorists really are.. Our world isn't controlled by the governments anymore.. It's being controlled by corporations.. And the word "corporation" can be viewed in a very broad way, which means it includes the police, military, large oil companies, Vatican etc.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 08:07 PM
link   
reply to post by vasaga
 


So your answer to how we deal with Terrorists and Dictators who help them and enable them is to do what? Nothing? Let people like Sadam continue to invade neighbors or fill mass graves with hundreds of thousands of his own people for fun?

I'm asking what the anti-War for any reason crowd would do to control the Monsters of this world? Would you ignore them and say to yourself, it does not involve me so it does not matter if they blow up other people? They invade a Nation, so what, not my problem?



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 08:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
reply to post by Cauch1
 


I haven't misuderstood you whatsover
However I believe you misunderstand yourself.

You believe you are against the war but believe troops should stay there if they are told to do so. That is a paradox in itself.

They are the only hope, they are the last line of defense against war.

I do understand that you believe the war is a sham, full of lies and is wrong. Yes I understand that.


Regardless of what anyone thinks about Iraq - I think you're missing the underlying principle behind what he's saying.

Yeah - a lot of us don't agree w/ the war in Iraq. However we signed up under a contract. Part of that states we'll follow lawful orders.

Now - you state you think all of us should start deserting or refusing to go.

Imagine, if you will - if that kind of choice was allowed what would happen if we had to fight against an invasion and you had some people in the Army then who wouldn't fight because they "didn't believe in killing." Where's your protection?

I'm sure you as well as others would be outraged that Soldiers who signed up to defend the US would back down from an invading force, but that's the same underlying principle as being in Iraq. If someone can't follow through with what they signed up to do, then how can they be trusted to do the other parts of their job?

Honestly.

This is the Army.

Army.

The war may or may not be overall liked. Oh well. The only things we're morally and legally obligated to disobey are blatantly illegal orders - ie - killing civilians, stealing stuff - etc. The op order sending a unit to Iraq is not an illegal order.

If he didn't want to go, he shouldn't have signed up. Any idiot knows the US has been in Iraq since 2003. Come on now.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 08:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
I'm curious. How would you deal with Terrorists and Dictators. Turn them a blind eye and ignore them? let them go on their merry way doing as they will to their people or to others? What is your answer to the Monsters of this world?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Well one I think I wouldn't do is send them truckloads of money



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Blaine91555
 


When you were funding saddam and giving him weapons America didnt seem to mind,he was still killing thousands of people.When he went rogue stopped dancing to your merry little tune, then thought of ditching the dollar for the euro...America to the rescue! spreading democracy! etc etc


Oh yes and a million people dead in the process!



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 08:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Solomons
 


Wow, I can't find any canceled checks showing the money I sent to Sadam?

Lets look at your logic. We fund him. Discover it is a mistake and that he is killing innocent people by the hundreds of thousands. He invades another country to steal their oil. You say we should compound that mistake with another by letting him continue? Is that what you mean?



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 08:18 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


You ignored my question completely. How would you deal with the Monsters of this world. Ignore them?



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 08:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Blaine91555
 


Even after it was shown that saddam gassed the kurds with mustard gas you were still funding him..so you knew he was killing civilians.The US senate passed measures to stop funding him/giving him weapons after this event was known about and the white house threw it out and continued funding him.



[edit on 26-2-2009 by Solomons]



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 08:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by vasaga
 


So your answer to how we deal with Terrorists and Dictators who help them and enable them is to do what? Nothing? Let people like Sadam continue to invade neighbors or fill mass graves with hundreds of thousands of his own people for fun?

I'm asking what the anti-War for any reason crowd would do to control the Monsters of this world? Would you ignore them and say to yourself, it does not involve me so it does not matter if they blow up other people? They invade a Nation, so what, not my problem?
Basically i said you need to be sure who the terrorists are first, then go on from there. You sound like you know who the terrorists are but i think you really have no idea. Correct me if I'm wrong.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 08:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Solomons
 


Once again, your answer is to NOT try and fix it? The people who did that are not in office now and I certainly had nothing to do with it. Because our leaders did wrong in the past we should now do nothing? As it is, much of the world does nothing but moan and groan and sit by and watch it happen. Don't those who do nothing share the guilt?



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 08:40 PM
link   
reply to post by vasaga
 


You are deflecting my question. What would you do? Forget for a moment about the American bashing. Pretend you personally are in charge. Do you sit back and complain and let it happen and pretend you are superior?

Carry it farther. You are dependent on that country for a vital resource.

No reason to continue the US are a-holes debate. We have a new government that has clean hands for the moment.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 08:58 PM
link   
Immoral duty? That's passe, and doesn't fly anymore. The newest thing is challenging Obama's eligibility to be President. So instead of looking like a total coward, you can look like a genius instead! It worked for Ron Paul!



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 09:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by vasaga
 


You are deflecting my question. What would you do? Forget for a moment about the American bashing. Pretend you personally are in charge. Do you sit back and complain and let it happen and pretend you are superior?

Carry it farther. You are dependent on that country for a vital resource.

No reason to continue the US are a-holes debate. We have a new government that has clean hands for the moment.
Yeah i am deflecting your question, and not because i don't want to or can't answer your question, but because some things are more important than fighting back.

First of all, if i was in charge? Easy. Tell the people what's really going on. That's the first thing. Until then, no action is justified, because every action by any government should be for the people and by the people. After that, suggest a course of action (might be war, but not bombarding cities like crazy for the "fun" of it..), and let people vote against or for it. If for it, plan takes on, if not, come up with something else.

It's very easy to say "war to exterminate them", but you need tot take a lot more things into account, like your finances, what you really do know about them etc. Now, they're just using terrorism as an excuse to bombard anything they like, which is plain WRONG. That was also the reason i was deflecting your question, because you clearly want it answered in one way and are neglecting a lot of things which you should take into account. And you ignored what i said too. Things aren't black and what as you want to put it. The "they kill so i kill" argument is simply not sound.

And oh.. Government clean hands? Oh please don't be so naive. You don't wanna know how often Obama contradicts himself.

[edit on 26-2-2009 by vasaga]



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 09:41 PM
link   
A few things need to be pointed out. This guy deserted in 2005, turned himself in in 2006, and then one day later deserted again when he found out they were going to send him back to his unit to be discharged or otherwise dealt with since he was a deserter and went AWOL during a time of war. I can't find anything on him more recent than 2007 when he was arrested in Canada apparently on suspicion of being in the country illegally. So he's a deserter and an illegal immigrant.

He joined for the money in 2004 and tried to claim manic depression before being sent to Iraq to begin with, then decided to go AWOL to Canada while on leave during his tour. He knew the country was at war and he knew he would likely be sent over when he joined, but that didn't stop him from signing the contract. If he wanted discharged, that's his choice and he should deal with the consequences seeing as how desertion a crime according to the UCMJ. But rather than turn himself in and be discharged he chickened out and deserted again.

Wiki - See the links at the bottom of the wiki article.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 10:16 PM
link   
Oh wow! Still people don't understand. If he doesn't do his job (go back to Iraq), he will get fired/discharged. He can hate it all he wants but it is his job. If he doesn't like that, I recommend he become a librarian or something.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 12:30 AM
link   
Never mind. I should have read all the entries.
2nd line.

[edit on 27-2-2009 by kyred]



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 01:31 AM
link   
I dont think anyone should do something if it seems immoral to them; because it probably is. If everything the army is doing over there is so great, why are so many returning us soldiers killing themselves?

if all soldiers followed their consciences first and refused to fight immoral wars, there wouldnt be any immoral wars.

people have emotions. no one can blindly follow orders in all situations. if you blindly follow orders that are against your conscience, just cuz you signed a piece of paper, what's to stop you from becoming like the nazis, if thats what you were ordered to do? I really hope that us soldiers continue to think for themselves, because unfortunately, you cant always trust the guys giving the orders. sometimes they might have bad or immoral intentions. If us soldiers were ever ordered to turn on their own citizens, should they do it? what if they were ordered to round women up like the japanese did with "comfort women"? (if you say they should blindly follow orders, then you say yes, they should do it, don't you?)

i'm not saying that its wrong to fight a moral battle. It would be better if there were no wars at all; but if someone is threatening your loved ones or families, i think its ok to defend them.

but if women or children (or civilians) are being killed or hurt in a war, or the war (or some act the soldier was ordered to do) is immoral for other reasons (e.g. no one has threatened your family); then i think soldiers have the right to break whatever contract they're in and refuse to fight. Isn't it the case for war crimes, that the law holds that there is a law higher than the law of the country or military law? And that's the ever lasting law of morality and conscience. the nazis were following orders, they had broken no law of their country, but because they didnt follow the higher law of their (and everyone's) conscience, they were tried and convicted of war crimes.

you might say, how can you have a crime in a war, when everyone is killing people, and war itself should be a crime; but the war crime idea i think comes from the idea of an injustice - an unjustified or IMMORAL act..which would be like genocide, rape, killing someone who hasn't threatened you, etc..

Oh, and if you think you can always trust your government, either you havent studied any history whatsoever, (so study the history of the world - modern and ancient) or you may not realize the vested interests working in the us (and other govts) today, the banking sector and how it was all set up... a pretty good book is jim marr's rule by secrecy. I say, read it, then do your own research on the list of reference and satisfy yourself if its true or not. the author has done a lot of interesting research i thought and there were quite a few things i didn't know (like nazis on the boards of companies involved with the concentration camps are still on the boards of some companies today, for one thing..).



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 02:35 AM
link   
The U.S. Government has already stated that it is beginning preparations to end the war. Before Obama even took office, we had already signed an agreement that set a date for the withdrawal of troops from all of Iraq's major cities, and a date for the complete withdrawal of our troops from the country.

The decision to leave, and when to do it, has already been made. All that's left is to plan and organize a withdrawal that will be safe for Iraq and for our troops.

So basically, this loser participated in the "immoral duty" when we were occupying, and now he's refusing to help protect his fellow soldiers and Iraq's citizens during what's likely to be a tumultuous withdrawal phase.

He's either making excuses, or he's dumber than poop.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join