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.

 

Should American Paratrooper be sent back to face discipline for Desertion

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 04:43 PM
link   


TORONTO -- "I'm coming for you," reads one threatening e-mail, laced with racism and obscenities. "Desserters [sic] should get shot in the back especially at war time," reads another.

Vicious messages, mostly from Americans, have flooded the inbox of 25-year-old Jeremy Hinzman, an American soldier who deserted to seek refugee status in Canada after refusing to participate in the war in Iraq, which he has called a "criminal enterprise".

Mr Hinzman, one of at least two US Army deserters to have fled north, now lives in a Toronto apartment with his wife and two-year-old son, awaiting a refugee hearing on Wednesday, when he will plead with Canadian authorities to allow him to stay.

The former paratrooper said he feels the e-mail vitriol, sent to an address posted on a web site set up by Canadian supporters, can only bolster his case to stay north of the border.




US Deserter's Canadian Campaign




Jeremy Hinzman fled to Canada with his wife, Nga Nguyen, and their son, Liam, in January

Should 25-year-old American paratrooper Jeremy Hinzman be granted refugee status? or sent back to North Carolinas Fort Braggs 82nd Airborne Division to face discipline or court-martial?
I personally believe he should be sent back, he signed on for a tour, he knew what he was getting into, and there is no place for his political point of view in his uniform



[edit on 6-7-2004 by Sauron] for grammer





[edit on 7-7-2004 by Sauron]

[edit on 7-7-2004 by Sauron]




posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 05:23 PM
link   
He obviously didn't mind cashing his military payroll checks during his stint in the military. So he took the money and ran. What a coward. Send this punk back and let him do 15 years in Levenworth.



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 06:24 PM
link   
I beleive they should send him back for disciplinary actions. Its a soldiers duty to follow his orders and political views certainly do not nullify that duty, not by a long shot. If i was a soldier and pres bush told me to to jump of a cliff with no 'chute', well hell pres bush better give me full military burial and benefits.

lol



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 06:37 PM
link   
Although I empathize with his feelings on the matter of the blind leading the seeing, desertion is a serious offense. If he just finished his four years and completed his contract, then left for canada then he is in the clear. If he is still contracted with the military then he should be court-martialed. There are tons of troops who feel they are there for the wrong reason, therefore taking the morale and the current events into consideration he should be tried and convicted, but not necessarily under the full extent, let that be determined on the basis of whether the administration is to be proven in the wrong. He still should be punished for bailing out, 'you can follow orders, but that doesn't mean that you should follow implications', few seem to understand this and thus feel entrapped.

[edit on 6-7-2004 by Crysstaafur]



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 10:29 PM
link   
Yes, as with the others, I think he should be sent back and sent to jail (or whatever punishment he should recieve).

He made a contract, and should be required to fulfill it to the end.



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 10:34 PM
link   
The heck with the contract, he let his squad mates down by deserting and in the military that is a no no whatever the reason - he's a coward forever in the eyes of the soldiers he served and trained with with.

Bring him back and let him serve out his hitch at Leavenworth.



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 10:40 PM
link   
Should he be reprimanded? Of course - good order and discipline demand it.

You know who I would like to see reprimanded as well - anyone within the NMC or NORAD chain of command for failure to act and execute their duties on 911. No heads have rolled yet - nor will they. A true sign of complacency or insider knowledge to something devious.

Many say follow the money. I say look at how much fallout results from the event.



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 11:25 PM
link   
I think if you jion the military you should stick with it and be a man not a pussy and run to canada.
But, the solution is simple, track him down and cut his balls off.



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 11:37 PM
link   
Yes, he should go back to face discipline for Desertion, there are channels for recourse, and if worse comes to worse, he could smoke some Mary Jane and get out with a General discharge. I also think he should be judged by his peers, so all of you armchair quarterbacks might want to tone down your punishment. Yes, he should be punished, but have you ever seen people crack in Iraq? I've had to hold the bolts from many rifles, from people cracking. I didn't feel anger, just pity. Somehow, they lost it, or never had it. Punish them for not doing what they were supposed to, but help them. Not everyone is as strong as you.



posted on Jul, 7 2004 @ 12:04 AM
link   
I say let Canada keep the guy. Never let him return to America.



posted on Jul, 7 2004 @ 12:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by NavyDog
You know who I would like to see reprimanded as well - anyone within the NMC or NORAD chain of command for failure to act and execute their duties on 911. No heads have rolled yet - nor will they. A true sign of complacency or insider knowledge to something devious.


Come on, there's a big difference and you know it. Save it for the 9/11 threads. Besides, that is just speculation, this is definitely fact.


Originally posted by curme
I also think he should be judged by his peers, so all of you armchair quarterbacks might want to tone down your punishment. Yes, he should be punished, but have you ever seen people crack in Iraq?


I will agree with you there, however once you sign that contract...well you know. The guy should definitley be punished, but along curme's lines, unless you are the one he deserted so to speak, go a little easy. Just wait for the guys/gals who have served to let em have it.

Edit:

Originally posted by zerotime
I say let Canada keep the guy. Never let him return to America.


Hee hee hee hee hee


[edit on 7-7-2004 by nyarlathotep]



posted on Jul, 7 2004 @ 12:31 AM
link   
I guess I'm going to get flamed for this but so be it. Won't be the first time OR the last.

He may be a soldier but he's also a human being and I guess he decided he loved his wife and child more and didn't want to leave his wife a widow or his child fatherless. To me he's the REAL hero. Also, he doesn't feel this is a war worth dying for. These are his feelings and I think they should be respected.

As to the poster who said he should never be allowed back in America, why would he even WANT to return ? After all the abuse he's getting from people who are nice and comfy sitting in their easy chairs typing out poison pen letters to the poor guy about # they themselves no dick about.



posted on Jul, 7 2004 @ 12:47 AM
link   
If the deserters do not want to come back to America then they should not mind the punishment of being banned from entering the USA. But the truth is that the deserters do want to come back to the USA - they just do not want to go to jail for 5 years. The US has a volunteer army. I completely understand why deserters must be punished. If deserters were not punished then a military could not function. No one in the right mind wants to go to war and face death. Everyone would be happy to join the Military during peacetime to get the rewards of paid college education and a paycheck, but as soon as war breaks out then everyone suddenly becomes a "conscience objector" and runs to Canada. It would be utter chaos.


[edit on 7-7-2004 by zerotime]



posted on Jul, 7 2004 @ 01:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by KayEm
I guess I'm going to get flamed for this but so be it. Won't be the first time OR the last.

He may be a soldier but he's also a human being and I guess he decided he loved his wife and child more and didn't want to leave his wife a widow or his child fatherless. To me he's the REAL hero. Also, he doesn't feel this is a war worth dying for. These are his feelings and I think they should be respected.

As to the poster who said he should never be allowed back in America, why would he even WANT to return ? After all the abuse he's getting from people who are nice and comfy sitting in their easy chairs typing out poison pen letters to the poor guy about # they themselves no dick about.


Yeah, you're right, you are going to get flamed for this. He should have never signed up for it then. Why is that so hard to understand? He knew what he signed up for. It didn't say fight for your country, unless you feel it was unjust. Are yopu f'n kidding me? Then everyone would opt out of war cuz it wasn't a legal war. Then where would your freedoms be?



posted on Jul, 7 2004 @ 01:13 AM
link   
It's called having a change of heart. He decided what was most important to him. His wife and child.

Last time I checked. Changing your mind was still considered a freedom in this country.

He wanted to keep his soul. I realize that maintaining what your heart and soul tells you is right is considered a non-issue in this country, but still there are some people who feel that it is ALL there is. What's most important.

My utter respect goes out to this man for doing what his gut intuition told him was best. I want his email in fact, so that I can counteract all the neanderthal machismo bull# that he's enduring from the testosterone overdosers.



posted on Jul, 7 2004 @ 01:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by KayEm
I want his email in fact, so that I can counteract all the neanderthal machismo bull# that he's enduring from the testosterone overdosers.


KayEm
Your a bit late his hearing is today



posted on Jul, 7 2004 @ 01:24 AM
link   
I see most people saying he should be forced to come back...I doubt he joined the military thinking he would have to fight in a war over oil. Does anyone know the exact reason why he deserted? Was he just scared over the fighting aspect or was it over what the war was based on?



posted on Jul, 7 2004 @ 01:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by IMAKECHAOS
I see most people saying he should be forced to come back...I doubt he joined the military thinking he would have to fight in a war over oil. Does anyone know the exact reason why he deserted? Was he just scared over the fighting aspect or was it over what the war was based on?


Hinzman, deserted after refusing to participate in the war in Iraq, which he has called a "criminal enterprise". decided he opposed the Iraq war while serving in Afghanistan,



[edit on 7-7-2004 by Sauron]



posted on Jul, 7 2004 @ 01:33 AM
link   
If you guys that are so quick to judge someone in a position that you have no true understanding of, then I suggest you go sign up for the green machine and put your money where your mouth is. The guy probably signed up to defend his country from a credible threat. There is no evidence to support that Iraq posed a serious threat to the National Security of the U.S. of A.

How does the saying go..."never judge a man unless you've walked a mile in his shoes" something like that.



posted on Jul, 7 2004 @ 01:55 AM
link   
yeah, we dont know what he saw, he could have just seen things that made him decide the war was unjust and disturbing.

[edit on 7-7-2004 by IMAKECHAOS]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join