- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
perhaps a 'decimation' style punishment might apply here? (see what I did there? Tied this in with another thread entirely un-related. Smooooth!)
Lieutenant defies US Army over ‘illegal’ war
- Thread starter big bad john
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 360
Didn't they mention 'stoning' in that thread? Sounds fine to me.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
big bad john said:
What a dirty great big pile of water buffalo crap!
What is wrong is sitting back while your brothers are fighting and dying. I see no courage here at all. He is a disgrace to the US Army, his Corps and as far as I am concerned, he is nothing but a yellow gutless coward hiding behind weak excuses. What ever happened to 'lead by example', and this is an officer?
Punt him (dishonourably), and give him no publicity, as the anti-war lefty do-gooder bleeding heart limp wristers wil be tree hugging him all they can, milking him and his 'story' for all he is worth.
Out,
Wes
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
To be honest, I believe that many of the comments directed at some form of physical/capital punishment are a bit over the top. Vindictiveness can be satisfying, but I believe that the US JAG is handling this admirably. As has been stated, the (soon to be ex-) Lt has political aspirations, and JAG seems to be doing it's best to not publicize his atrocious behaviour.
Keep him out of the media. Court martial him, deal with him within the confines of the law, and make damned sure he is never in another position to make such poor choices. Dishonourable discharge after he has served his time painting rocks. Remove his pension.
A query: Can someone who has been charged criminally in the states still run for office? It seems to me that of the 3 charges he is facing, he might render himself ineligible for office. Perhaps that why he seems to be trying to bend over backwards to broker a deal? Hmmm...
Keep him out of the media. Court martial him, deal with him within the confines of the law, and make damned sure he is never in another position to make such poor choices. Dishonourable discharge after he has served his time painting rocks. Remove his pension.
A query: Can someone who has been charged criminally in the states still run for office? It seems to me that of the 3 charges he is facing, he might render himself ineligible for office. Perhaps that why he seems to be trying to bend over backwards to broker a deal? Hmmm...
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Below is the commissioning oath for US Army officers. There isn't much wiggle room here. This guy violated his oath and that's pretty much it. It's one thing for a private to go AWOL or miss a movement. This guy was a platoon leader with Soldiers under him. He was charged with leading his Soldiers and taking them to war. I definitely don't think the Army is going to execute him or anything like that. I do believe that he will be made an example of though. I have absolutely no sympathy for this guy. He joined the Army supposedly in a patriotic fervor after 9-11. Then, when his unit got orders to go to Iraq, he decided it wasn't a just war. Super, but he was still a Soldier with duties and responsibilities. I'm not a big fan of OIF, but if you're in the armed forces, you have a job to do.
Commissioning oath:
I, (state your name), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of Second Lieutenant, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of The United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter. So help me God.
Commissioning oath:
I, (state your name), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of Second Lieutenant, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of The United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter. So help me God.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 360
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1110AP_War_Objector.html
Thursday, August 17, 2006 · Last updated 2:39 a.m. PT
Soldier who wouldn't deploy faces court
By MELANTHIA MITCHELL
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER
SEATTLE -- An Army officer who refused to serve in Iraq because he believes the war is illegal was steadfast in his resolve ahead of a military court hearing, saying the decision was "my obligation to this country."
1st Lt. Ehren Watada, 28, of Honolulu, faces a possible court-martial for refusing to deploy to Iraq on June 22 with his Fort Lewis-based unit.
"I made this decision a long time ago," Watada said during a telephone interview. "It is my obligation to this country. I'm not happy about it and I didn't want to do it, but I had to."
A hearing Thursday at Fort Lewis was to determine if he should stand trial. He was charged last month with conduct unbecoming an officer, missing troop movement and contempt toward officials.
His lawyer, Eric Seitz, said he has lined up two witnesses to support the soldier's claim that the war violated domestic and international law: University of Illinois professor Francis Boyle, an international law expert, and Denis Halliday, a former United Nations assistant secretary-general.
Watada has been reassigned to the Headquarters and Headquarters Company, I Corps, and now works in an administrative position at the post.
"You don't join the military just to blindly follow whatever orders you're given," he said. "An order to go to an unlawful and immoral war based on false pretenses is no different than to kill innocent civilians."
After the hearing, an investigating officer will recommend to commanders whether Watada should stand trial. If convicted, he could face more than seven years in prison and a dishonorable discharge
Thursday, August 17, 2006 · Last updated 2:39 a.m. PT
Soldier who wouldn't deploy faces court
By MELANTHIA MITCHELL
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER
SEATTLE -- An Army officer who refused to serve in Iraq because he believes the war is illegal was steadfast in his resolve ahead of a military court hearing, saying the decision was "my obligation to this country."
1st Lt. Ehren Watada, 28, of Honolulu, faces a possible court-martial for refusing to deploy to Iraq on June 22 with his Fort Lewis-based unit.
"I made this decision a long time ago," Watada said during a telephone interview. "It is my obligation to this country. I'm not happy about it and I didn't want to do it, but I had to."
A hearing Thursday at Fort Lewis was to determine if he should stand trial. He was charged last month with conduct unbecoming an officer, missing troop movement and contempt toward officials.
His lawyer, Eric Seitz, said he has lined up two witnesses to support the soldier's claim that the war violated domestic and international law: University of Illinois professor Francis Boyle, an international law expert, and Denis Halliday, a former United Nations assistant secretary-general.
Watada has been reassigned to the Headquarters and Headquarters Company, I Corps, and now works in an administrative position at the post.
"You don't join the military just to blindly follow whatever orders you're given," he said. "An order to go to an unlawful and immoral war based on false pretenses is no different than to kill innocent civilians."
After the hearing, an investigating officer will recommend to commanders whether Watada should stand trial. If convicted, he could face more than seven years in prison and a dishonorable discharge
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 360
http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-2041228.php
Video: Officer urges others to refuse deployment
By Melanthia Mitchell
Associated Press
SEATTLE — A lietenant facing possible court martial for refusing to go to Iraq called on other soldiers to throw down their weapons in a video shown Thursday as the Army mounted its case against the officer.
The video, taken at the Veterans for Peace convention last weekend in Seattle, was presented by Army prosecutors at Fort Lewis during a hearing to determine whether 1st Lt. Ehren Watada will stand trial.
Watada, 28, of Honolulu, was charged last month with conduct unbecoming an officer, missing troop movement and contempt toward officials. He refused to deploy to Iraq on June 22 with his Stryker unit, the 3rd Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division based at Fort Lewis.
Watada has been reassigned to the Headquarters and Headquarters Company, I Corps, and now works in an administrative position at the post.
The prosecution played a total of three video clips with comments Watada made over the weekend as well as on June 7, when he publicly announced his decision to refuse deployment.
On Thursday, Watada sat quietly, flanked by his attorneys, Eric Seitz of Honolulu and Army Capt. Mark Kim. His father and stepmother sat in the back of the hearing room.
The government called its only witness, a Capt. J.C. Kaplan, with the 3rd Brigade. Kaplan said he oversaw administrative and logistical operations as the brigade prepared for deployment in June and was there June 22 when Watada failed to show.
Kaplan said he had to escort Watada to his assigned quarters. “He was restricted to post,” he said.
Watada has been very public in his disagreement with the war, including making statements that he felt the Bush administration deceived Americans in order to initiate the war.
Seitz has said such comments are protected free speech.
Seitz planned to present evidence during the Article 32 hearing, the military equivalent of a grand jury proceeding, to support Watada’s contention that the Iraq invasion violated domestic and international law.
On Wednesday night, Seitz met with two witnesses, University of Illinois professor Francis Boyle, an international law expert, and Denis Halliday, a former United Nations assistant secretary-general.
Watada himself was calm.
“I made this decision a long time ago,” he said during a telephone interview Wednesday night. “It is my obligation to this country. I’m not happy about it and I didn’t want to do it, but I had to.”
“You don’t join the military just to blindly follow whatever orders you’re given,” he said. “An order to go to an unlawful and immoral war based on false pretenses is no different than to kill innocent civilians.”
After the hearing, an investigating officer will recommend to commanders whether Watada should stand trial. If convicted, he could face more than seven years in prison and a dishonorable discharge.
Watada’s stance has prompted several rallies and declarations of support.
A group gathered Wednesday night at a bridge near Fort Lewis to demand he not be court-martialed.
“Watada is a real sign of courage to stand up to something that is so illegal and so unjust,” said the Rev. Bill Bichsell, 78, who works with the homeless in Tacoma. “He’s a sign of conscience, he’s a sign of resistance.”
On Tuesday, the American Civil Liberties Union of Washington submitted a friend-of-the-court brief contending Watada should not be punished for his comments on the war.
“Soldiers should not be court-martialed for explaining their views on important political issues when doing so does not adversely affect military functioning,” said Kathleen Taylor, executive director of the ACLU’s Washington chapter. “Lt. Watada was exercising his free speech rights as a citizen in a democratic society. “
Video: Officer urges others to refuse deployment
By Melanthia Mitchell
Associated Press
SEATTLE — A lietenant facing possible court martial for refusing to go to Iraq called on other soldiers to throw down their weapons in a video shown Thursday as the Army mounted its case against the officer.
The video, taken at the Veterans for Peace convention last weekend in Seattle, was presented by Army prosecutors at Fort Lewis during a hearing to determine whether 1st Lt. Ehren Watada will stand trial.
Watada, 28, of Honolulu, was charged last month with conduct unbecoming an officer, missing troop movement and contempt toward officials. He refused to deploy to Iraq on June 22 with his Stryker unit, the 3rd Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division based at Fort Lewis.
Watada has been reassigned to the Headquarters and Headquarters Company, I Corps, and now works in an administrative position at the post.
The prosecution played a total of three video clips with comments Watada made over the weekend as well as on June 7, when he publicly announced his decision to refuse deployment.
On Thursday, Watada sat quietly, flanked by his attorneys, Eric Seitz of Honolulu and Army Capt. Mark Kim. His father and stepmother sat in the back of the hearing room.
The government called its only witness, a Capt. J.C. Kaplan, with the 3rd Brigade. Kaplan said he oversaw administrative and logistical operations as the brigade prepared for deployment in June and was there June 22 when Watada failed to show.
Kaplan said he had to escort Watada to his assigned quarters. “He was restricted to post,” he said.
Watada has been very public in his disagreement with the war, including making statements that he felt the Bush administration deceived Americans in order to initiate the war.
Seitz has said such comments are protected free speech.
Seitz planned to present evidence during the Article 32 hearing, the military equivalent of a grand jury proceeding, to support Watada’s contention that the Iraq invasion violated domestic and international law.
On Wednesday night, Seitz met with two witnesses, University of Illinois professor Francis Boyle, an international law expert, and Denis Halliday, a former United Nations assistant secretary-general.
Watada himself was calm.
“I made this decision a long time ago,” he said during a telephone interview Wednesday night. “It is my obligation to this country. I’m not happy about it and I didn’t want to do it, but I had to.”
“You don’t join the military just to blindly follow whatever orders you’re given,” he said. “An order to go to an unlawful and immoral war based on false pretenses is no different than to kill innocent civilians.”
After the hearing, an investigating officer will recommend to commanders whether Watada should stand trial. If convicted, he could face more than seven years in prison and a dishonorable discharge.
Watada’s stance has prompted several rallies and declarations of support.
A group gathered Wednesday night at a bridge near Fort Lewis to demand he not be court-martialed.
“Watada is a real sign of courage to stand up to something that is so illegal and so unjust,” said the Rev. Bill Bichsell, 78, who works with the homeless in Tacoma. “He’s a sign of conscience, he’s a sign of resistance.”
On Tuesday, the American Civil Liberties Union of Washington submitted a friend-of-the-court brief contending Watada should not be punished for his comments on the war.
“Soldiers should not be court-martialed for explaining their views on important political issues when doing so does not adversely affect military functioning,” said Kathleen Taylor, executive director of the ACLU’s Washington chapter. “Lt. Watada was exercising his free speech rights as a citizen in a democratic society. “
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Sorry if I offend anyone, but this deserves a rant......
This isn't a NAM era draftee or conscript. I might have a very small amount of sympathy for him if he were. This gutless wonder not only voluntarily signed on the dotted line to serve his country, he took an oath as an officer; a leader of troops. His father is a politician.....so what? What makes this guy any different than the thousands of troops that put their a** on the line evryday in Iraq, because that is what they do?
I am sorry, but if anyone joins the military, whether on a full-time or part-time basis, and even thinks for a minute that there isn't a chance that someday you might actually have to fight for your country, they are kidding themselves. It's not the Boy Scouts; to quote General Rick Hillier:
"We're not the public service of Canada, we're not just another department. We are the Canadian Forces, and our job is to be able to kill people."
This punk apparently has political aspirations after the military, and just wanted to be able to say he served in the military to further his political career; if he still has one. How could this guy be trusted as a politician, if he pulls a stunt like this when he is ordered to step up to the plate, and do his sworn duty? He's lucky he lives where he does, because in a less civilized one he would probably get two orders.....kneel and face the ditch.
I say.....HANG HIM......prosecute him to the fullest extent of military justice. Then boot his a** out. This cheese head is laughing in the face of any brave soul who serves their country willingly, because that is what they signed up for!!!
I am hopfully returning to the PRes this fall. I have a fiance, step-daughter, 2 jobs, house, two vehicles, friends, family and a life. But if my country calls me, I won't use an slack-a** excuse to skirt my committment. I'll do my duty, just like most would.
This isn't a NAM era draftee or conscript. I might have a very small amount of sympathy for him if he were. This gutless wonder not only voluntarily signed on the dotted line to serve his country, he took an oath as an officer; a leader of troops. His father is a politician.....so what? What makes this guy any different than the thousands of troops that put their a** on the line evryday in Iraq, because that is what they do?
I am sorry, but if anyone joins the military, whether on a full-time or part-time basis, and even thinks for a minute that there isn't a chance that someday you might actually have to fight for your country, they are kidding themselves. It's not the Boy Scouts; to quote General Rick Hillier:
"We're not the public service of Canada, we're not just another department. We are the Canadian Forces, and our job is to be able to kill people."
This punk apparently has political aspirations after the military, and just wanted to be able to say he served in the military to further his political career; if he still has one. How could this guy be trusted as a politician, if he pulls a stunt like this when he is ordered to step up to the plate, and do his sworn duty? He's lucky he lives where he does, because in a less civilized one he would probably get two orders.....kneel and face the ditch.
I say.....HANG HIM......prosecute him to the fullest extent of military justice. Then boot his a** out. This cheese head is laughing in the face of any brave soul who serves their country willingly, because that is what they signed up for!!!
I am hopfully returning to the PRes this fall. I have a fiance, step-daughter, 2 jobs, house, two vehicles, friends, family and a life. But if my country calls me, I won't use an slack-a** excuse to skirt my committment. I'll do my duty, just like most would.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
+1 medicman
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 60
This is only my second post so if I do something wrong please let me know.
When I first heard about this guy my first reaction was, "jeez what an ########. Then I thought about it (perhaps too much) and thought "well at least he is standing up for something he believes" so I gave him just a tad bit of respect. However he seems to have crossed a line with his encouraging other soldiers to not go to Iraq. He is an officer and is he not encouraging desertion. Is there not US Army regulations about this.
On another note, does this guy think he can ever be a leader to to other troops. They could never trust him. Deciding, as a matter of personal conscience that he can not follow these orders is one thing, to encourage others to follow his example is another!
Hang him out to dry!
When I first heard about this guy my first reaction was, "jeez what an ########. Then I thought about it (perhaps too much) and thought "well at least he is standing up for something he believes" so I gave him just a tad bit of respect. However he seems to have crossed a line with his encouraging other soldiers to not go to Iraq. He is an officer and is he not encouraging desertion. Is there not US Army regulations about this.
On another note, does this guy think he can ever be a leader to to other troops. They could never trust him. Deciding, as a matter of personal conscience that he can not follow these orders is one thing, to encourage others to follow his example is another!
Hang him out to dry!
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Trinity said:
Shoudln't we be saying 1+ and the Bishop saying +1?? :
Similar threads
