Look at this Buttercup....
Link:
Copy: http://hotzone.yahoo.com/b/hotzone/blogs19056
Ok, I have NO problems with people who are conscientious objectors not going to war. And I respect people's opinions no matter how left or right of center they may be. However, this fellow has not got a pot to piss in. He is basing his position and his actions upon emotional reasoning with little or zero hard facts to support him. Much as he feels the depth of his conviction towards his ideals, that does not make him right. Nor will it save him. The boy is going to MILITARY prison for, essentially, being a coward in the eyes of his military peers. I imagine that he'll be as popular in that setting as child molestors are in civilian prisons. He's looking at a tough break. The Army is going to come down hard on him because they cannot brook this sort of action or risk its repetition. I imagine his mistakes were made in how he went about declaring his position and the court will exploit that.
And in my own opinion... if you are an officer in a combat unit, you do not question orders. Ok, if someone said to kill a bunch of unarmed kids (assuming they are not trafficing weapons or anything, just a bunch of innocent kids... then YES, you disobey orders). Basically, this guy is a tool and while he is entitled to his own beliefs, he remains responsible to his fellow soldiers for the fulfilment of his duties as a soldier himself as well as to obey orders as given.
Does he think he's the only guy in the armed forces who doesn't want to deploy?
TOOL!
posted by Tusc at 1/04/2007 01:58:00 AM
1 Comments:
Likewise, he is himself an officer. Not a rank one reaches quickly or without intent. He probably did the ROTC thing and then joined up. So he saw with open eyes how things were looking. We went to Iraq in 2003 and had been in Afghanistan before then. This dude has a 4 year hitch and I'm guessing he re-upped at some point since 2003 since he would not be great to send to Iraq if he was going to muster out in just a few months of combat and not the full year. So I am making the presumption that he re-upped semi-recently (last year or two?). To me, that means he really was NOT so opposed to the situation overseas. The info regarding WMDs and the lack of them was apparent by the end of the first month in Iraq in 2003. By this guy's reasoning, any operation with bad intel is illegal... so aspects of every operation on the planet have illegal elements?
It's too bad a guy like this is an officer. But it's better that he's being dealt with at home instead of being overseas where he might decide to frag friendlies... which is a COMMON occurrence with these types as evidenced by history.
2:44 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home