AWOL US Soldier seeks asylum in Canada

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

He'll be sent back. Martin is trying to make good with Bush right now.

[Lord of The Curry 0]

I found it funny that Macleans went on for so long with the Yankee-bashing but out of the blue (but unmistakeably coinciding with GW's visit) they come up with a cover page that talks about how it's time for us to be friends with the States again.

[Dr. Tom 0]

Never met a person who DID join for honor, country, service, and all that happy horseshit. Sorry. But its true.

Our experiences are completely different, then. While I've never been in the military, I have worked for the Army for about five years now, and I've met a lot of soldiers, NCOs, and officers in my day. While I haven't talked to all of them at length, the ones I have joined for much nobler reasons than college money. In fact, I can't recall a single NCO or officer who cited college money as a reason for joining. Many of them did it because they felt the Army would put their skills to the best use, others did it because their grandfather, father, and brothers had all been in the Army. I've met a few folks in the other branches, and again, I can't recall anyone who says they signed on for the college money.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

1. He already served in Afganistan, so I don't know how he can be labelled "cowardly".

 

2. There is a mention of "cruel and unusual" punishment given to folks who go AWOL. Maybe he knows something we don't, I can certainly see there reason to believe that his treatment would be a such, especially with the way Cerebus sees him.

 

3. There was an article in the Saturday Sun talking about other soliders wanting refugee status. These were soldiers who were in Iraq. They talked about having killed innocent people and dumping the bodies into a ditch. I suppose *they* are pussies also.

 

4. http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/TorontoSun/N.../07/769383.html

 

The first article didn't tell the whole story. This doesn't either, but it tells more of it.

[Special K 0]

My brother went to Panama, and was repulsed by what he saw there. I think some soldiers are definitely ready to defend their country, but not ready for all the collateral damage. That isn't being a pussy, that's moral revulsion.

[Justice 0]

My brother went to Panama, and was repulsed by what he saw there. I think some soldiers are definitely ready to defend their country, but not ready for all the collateral damage. That isn't being a pussy, that's moral revulsion.

Uh, this guy hasn't been in Iraq yet. Frankly, skipping out of his duty, especially this way, is pretty damn cowardly.

[Guest Cerebus]

1. He already served in Afganistan, so I don't know how he can be labelled "cowardly".

 

His service in Afghanistan doesn't, and shouldn't, have any bearing. He got called for duty and fled. That's AWOL.

 

2. There is a mention of "cruel and unusual" punishment given to folks who go AWOL.  Maybe he knows something we don't, I can certainly see there reason to believe that his treatment would be a such, especially with the way Cerebus sees him.

 

Cruel and unusual punishment? He broke his contract, he violated the UCMJ, he will be sent to prison. He won't be hung, or shot, or mutilated. I don't know what MY view on him matters at all. What might he say? He'll be ostracized in prison b/c he went AWOL? Boo-fucking-hoo.

 

3. There was an article in the Saturday Sun talking about other soliders wanting refugee status.  These were soldiers who were in Iraq.  They talked about having killed innocent people and dumping the bodies into a ditch.  I suppose *they* are pussies also.

 

Nice no-link. I wouldn't be surprised if it was total bullshit either.

 

4. http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/TorontoSun/N.../07/769383.html

 

The first article didn't tell the whole story.  This doesn't either, but it tells more of it.

 

What an awful article.

 

All of this, he explained, was meant to desensitize soldiers and to dehumanize their enemies, so that killing them would be "as easy as shooting beer cans."

 

Somehow, he said, it just didn't seem right.

 

I almost laughed out loud at this. Obviously the author knows jack shit about the military. If it bugged this asshole that much why didn't he leave during basic, it is not easy but it is possible if it disturbs you that much. But he didn't. He stuck with it and ended up in the Army. If he really didn't feel fighting in the Iraq war was right, why did he flee to Canada? Why didn't he stand up for what he believed in and take his punishment like a man? This little twat wants to have his cake (not fight in Iraq) and eat it too (not get punished for being AWOL). As far as I'm concerned, he's a fucking disgrace to the military he joined.

[cbacon 0]

We're not talking about what I would "theoretically" do or the "ethics" of invasion.

 

We're not? Isn't that the basis of this soldier going AWOL?

 

We're talking about a military man who wussed out and fled with his tail between his legs because he was a worthless coward.

 

He's a coward for not wanting to be thrown into a situation where he's killing innocent civilians?

 

As I mentioned before, there are people in the military in Iraq who probably don't agree that we should be there in the first place, although not many despite what that fat ass Moore has to say.

 

I can imagine many more are feeling those sentiments, given the mess they are in, and the many who were forced to stay after their contracts ran out. A group of soldiers are already filing lawsuits.

 

This pissant, like the little pussy that he is, fled instead of going to Iraq or even going to the brig and taking his punishment like a man.

 

Yeah, what a pussy! Passing up bombing the shit out of innocent civilians is SO cowardly! Excuse me while I crack open a six pack. USA! USA! USA!

 

Now he's relying on morons like you to keep his sorry ass from being thrown into the jail he richly deserves.

 

So I ask you again, when would it acceptable to say no? Obviously your inability to answer the theoretical question speaks volumes. Is the word ethics erased when it comes to these sorts of things? Or should they just go along with whatever their govenrment tells them because it's a 'just cause', not like they'd be mis-led or anything, heavens no. The Germans used this ideology quite well at one point.

 

Now, i'll await for you to go on a tangent about how clueless I am about the military in a vain attempt to try and justify the moral implications of going to war, or any soldier who has the balls to take a stand up against his country and say 'no more'.

[cbacon 0]

My brother went to Panama, and was repulsed by what he saw there. I think some soldiers are definitely ready to defend their country, but not ready for all the collateral damage. That isn't being a pussy, that's moral revulsion.

Uh, this guy hasn't been in Iraq yet. Frankly, skipping out of his duty, especially this way, is pretty damn cowardly.

Yeah, he hasn't been in Iraq yet, maybe things will be peachy keen once he gets there. I guess moral revulsion takes a back seat to these sorts of things...

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

His service in Afghanistan doesn't, and shouldn't, have any bearing. He got called for duty and fled. That's AWOL.

 

"worthless coward"

" pissing on the families of soldiers who sucked it up and sacrificed so much and left thier home and families to do their duty."

"I doubt many of our uniformed men and woman were thrilled about leaving their families either, but they did, and are doing, their duty. If you don't have the (figurative) balls to do that, you're lower than a worm in my eyes."

"This guy has no ethics. He has no sense of duty, he has no honor, he has nothing besides concern over his own worthless hide. "

"We're talking about a military man who wussed out and fled with his tail between his legs because he was a worthless coward."

 

... meh, I'm not even half-way down the page now...

 

He got called for duty in Afganistan and went, that doesn't have any bearing? I'd say that takes "ethics", "guts", "sense of duty", "worth", "bravery", "balls", "leave from home", and "sacrifice". Don't you?

 

I don't know what MY view on him matters at all.

 

You were someone who served in the armed forces and you view him as scum, calling him every possible name. I'd imagine that extreme sentiment would be shared among many in the service, and especially in the guards and MP's. Not exactly the best environment to be in.

 

(moved around)Cruel and unusual punishment? He broke his contract, he violated the UCMJ, he will be sent to prison. He won't be hung, or shot, or mutilated.What might he say? He'll be ostracized in prison b/c he went AWOL? Boo-fucking-hoo.

 

Well, the US military doesn't have the best record of protecting prisoners [/cheapabughraibjoke]

 

I don't know how the US treats their prisoners. If the guards have the same mentality as you, I don't imagine it would be "usual" or all that "nice". Prison isn't supposed to be a nice place, but there is such a thing as prisoners rights. I imagine the military would be especially tough on deserters given the need for soliders at the moment, so I again imagine that they'd want to make going AWOL as undesirable as possible. So if there are certain unwritten rules about, say, raping prisoners, depriving them of sleep/other torture methods, etc. then that could qualify under cruel and unusual.

 

Nice no-link. I wouldn't be surprised if it was total bullshit either.

 

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/Columnists/Toronto/Michele_Mandel/2004/12/05/765951.html

 

But let's call every story I post lies, and every story you post truth. I don't want to disturb any view of the world you have where people who don't want to kill other people or be killed themselves are "pussies".

 

What an awful article.

 

Of course, it lends support for this "worthless coward".

 

I almost laughed out loud at this. Obviously the author knows jack shit about the military. If it bugged this asshole that much why didn't he leave during basic, it is not easy but it is possible if it disturbs you that much. But he didn't. He stuck with it and ended up in the Army.

 

He said his childs birth put him over. His kid is 2 1/2. He enrolled in 2001. It's 2004. It's kinda, sorta, maybe, a lil bit, possible that the kid was born after basic.

 

If he really didn't feel fighting in the Iraq war was right, why did he flee to Canada?

 

First he applied for reassignment in a non-combat role... twice... this wasn't just a spur-of-the-moment decision. Wait, sorry, I forgot I'm conforming to your view on things... THAT FUCKING PUSSY! KILL LIKE A MAN, YOU LIL BITCH!

 

Why didn't he stand up for what he believed in and take his punishment like a man? This little twat wants to have his cake (not fight in Iraq) and eat it too (not get punished for being AWOL).

 

Because he didn't want to be away from his family any more than he already did? Oh, that's another pussy reason. Sorry.

 

As far as I'm concerned, he's a fucking disgrace to the military he joined.

 

I'd say its a disgrace of the freedom that military is supposedly "defending" to lock him up for not wanting to be a killer.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

Alright, it's not fair for him to be responding to two posts like this. I'll step out, or just reply to anything significant

[Vyce 0]

Two things:

 

1. Your ENTIRE premise, "He's really BRAVE because he doesn't want to go over to Iraq and be a KILLER of INNOCENT people" is flawed (and worthless) from the very beginning, considering that regardless of how one feels about the Iraq War, the insurgents that he would potentially be killing are hardly innocents.

 

Unless you view them in the same light as INXS, conceiving them to be mere freedom fighters, in which case my contempt for you would know no bounds (as it does with hunger).

 

2.) He's not a pussy for not wanting to go fight in a military conflict that he morally opposes.

 

He's a coward because instead of abiding by the laws that govern his very existence - not just American society but the military society to which he willingly entered of his own free will - he's chosen to turn tail and run to our socialistic, limp-wristed "brothers" up north. If he had any real bravery, he would oppose the war, yet be man (and SOLDIER) enough to face the consequences of his refusal to comply with his orders.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

I never called him brave. There's a difference between not being a pussy and being brave. Read the article where the soldlier talks about killing people who were not insurgents.

 

You're spouting Cerebus' talking points with a MikeSC-flair for twisting words around. He went to Afganistan and was willing to serve in a position that didn't involve him killing others. That's not cowardly.

[Justice 0]

We're not talking about what I would "theoretically" do or the "ethics" of invasion.

 

We're not? Isn't that the basis of this soldier going AWOL?

No, we aren't. Whether or not you think the invasion was "ethical" doesn't null and void your contract.

 

And even if I DID object to something like "bombing a small village" I'd go up into military court and defend myself and my actions there. I wouldn't try to flee the country.

 

He's a coward for not wanting to be thrown into a situation where he's killing innocent civilians?

 

Ah great. Can't have a C-Bacon post without some mention of "Bombing the fuck out of Innocent civilians!" Now all I need to find is "Imperial Racist Hegemony" and I'll get a bingo on my leftist cliches scorecard.

 

I can imagine many more are feeling those sentiments, given the mess they are in, and the many who were forced to stay after their contracts ran out. A group of soldiers are already filing lawsuits.

 

Actually, you dolt, what you are talking about is those asking for "Extended Leave" requests, not actual lawsuits. They aren't filing lawsuits because, well, they knew their contractual obligations. Sorry, bud, nice try.

 

Yeah, what a pussy! Passing up bombing the shit out of innocent civilians is SO cowardly! Excuse me while I crack open a six pack. USA! USA! USA!

 

Yeah, seriously. Let's make conspiratorial claims about an overarching US plot to overthow the world through consumerism, toss out overly vague statements about American Imperialism in the region without giving any sort of feasible solution, hold hands and read CommonDreams.org to figure out where we stand on everything so that we know we aren't being brainwashed by the Media, currently in the iron grip of the Right. Hey, come on, he only killed 300,000 people. Didn't Pinochet kill more?

 

So I ask you again, when would it acceptable to say no? Obviously your inability to answer the theoretical question speaks volumes. Is the word ethics erased when it comes to these sorts of things? Or should they just go along with whatever their govenrment tells them because it's a 'just cause', not like they'd be mis-led or anything, heavens no. The Germans used this ideology quite well at one point.

 

Now, i'll await for you to go on a tangent about how clueless I am about the military in a vain attempt to try and justify the moral implications of going to war, or any soldier who has the balls to take a stand up against his country and say 'no more'.

 

Has anyone seen the great hypocracy in the Germany comparison in ANYTHING? I mean, seriously, when one uses it, it's just as bad as "With us or against us", because it's THE EXACT SAME MENTALITY.

 

But anyways...

 

When is it okay to say no? You can say it, but it doesn't mean that we'll suddenly obey. As far as I'm concerned, he can say he doesn't want to go over there as much as he wants and can disagree with it as much as he wants. But he still has a contract to uphold, and by breaking that contract it inflicts penalties. If he were as honest as he is in his convictions, he'd stay at home, go to trial and probably do his time. Last time I checked, there isn't an "opt out" clause in your military contract and he should have realized that there's always the possibility of a war when joining the army.

[Justice 0]

I never called him brave. There's a difference between not being a pussy and being brave. Read the article where the soldlier talks about killing people who were not insurgents.

 

You're spouting Cerebus' talking points with a MikeSC-flair for twisting words around. He went to Afganistan and was willing to serve in a position that didn't involve him killing others. That's not cowardly.

Yeah, let's back off a little bit here. RRR is sort of getting caught up in the Crossfire, though I don't agree with him at all in the situation.

 

Well, actually, RRR, that was more directed at C-Bacon, most likely. That's what happens when you get a guy like him on your side.

 

Why is he a coward? Because he won't take the punishment for abdicating his duties. Sorry, your appeals failed. Too bad. That doesn't give you the special right to be able to seek refuge in Canada. If you really want to stay out of combat that bad, take the trial and do the jail time. You know, if he did that, I'd have a LOT more respect for him.

 

Cere does have a point where he says "If he didn't like the whole 'mentality' they were setting up for him, he could have left at basic. He stayed, he has an obligation now, and they are only trying to hold him to it." Good for him to go to Afganistan, but when it comes down to it, he's still abdicating his duty in a fashion that would more befit a coward than someone who is really standing up for his beliefs.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

Perhaps I just don't get the mentality behind this. Canada doesn't generally have war films, it's not really in our culture. I don't have any family in the military. I respect and appreciate what it takes to be in the armed services, so much so that I know I'd suck so much ass in it. So perhaps I can identify more with someone who doesn't feel right in it, than someone who is readily willing to pick up a gun and kill. I get why they must be imprisoned for deserting, but I don't get why it's such a disgrace to say "I don't want to do this". All these people are doing is becoming a regular citizen again. They never hurt anyone, they didn't turn on their country by affiliating with the enemy, they just didn't want to do something which takes a shitload of balls. That doesn't make them gutless or cowards, it just makes them normal. A cowardly thing to do would be if you're being invaded by another country and you're running away to another country - there really isn't a "choice" in that matter, it's something you have to do. But when you're part of the invaders, then it becomes a choice.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

Canada actually has a proud military history, but this thread isn't about that.

 

I would have inifinitely more respect for this man if he turned himself in to American authorities. Yes, he does have a choice not to fight. But the alternative is prison, and he damn well knew this when he signed up. So the choice comes down to prison vs. fighting. He didn't like that choice so he ran. That's what makes him a coward. Things would be different if he was drafted, but with a volunteer military he knew what he was getting into. It is the same thing here.

 

Not only that, but he made the situation worse for himself. Had he turned himself in, they probably would have gone lenient on him. Now if he ends up back in American custody, and he in all likelihood will, he theoretically faces the death penalty. So not only is he cowardly, he's also stupid. He should have bolted to France or something.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

Actually, he probably didn't know he was getting into. When he enlisted the US wasn't in a combat situation and certainly not in a combat situation with Iraq (if we are to assume he signed up in a post-9/11 impulse (which wasn't stated, but is a possibility) that is _still_ different than going into Iraq). And if it wasn't, sure there is always the possibility of going into war at any moment, but then that is weighed against the probability of going to war.

 

A lot of his decision to flee up north was family-based, so Canada probably looked more attractive than France, or jail for that matter. Can't blame em. Of course, I wouldn't be in that position in the first place, so I can certainly see that side of the argument of lying in the bed you made. I just don't think the use of the word "coward" is appropriate here. If it were maybe 3 months, then I'd probably be with ya on this. A year, with the probable treatment you'd be getting? No thanks.

 

Canada's military history is something that we look at as "hey, that's cool", but we certainly don't look at it like the US does and it isn't engrained into our culture like it is in the states. Winning the Gold in the Olympics in Hockey probably instills more nationalistic pride than our war efforts... Actually, my Grandfather was in the Air Force, now that I think of it.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

That is to be expected when you agree to join the military. I have no sympathy there for him. If you join the army, you have to expect to fight at some point.

 

Remembrance Day is one of our biggest holidays for a reason. World War I was the most important thing in our history that led us to becoming the nation that we are today. Nothing that we have ever done as a nation surpasses Vimy Ridge.

[Guest Cerebus]

... meh, I'm not even half-way down the page now...

 

He got called for duty in Afganistan and went, that doesn't have any bearing? I'd say that takes "ethics", "guts", "sense of duty", "worth", "bravery", "balls", "leave from home", and "sacrifice". Don't you?

 

Sure. That doesn't reduce his cowardice in the face of his Iraq deployment any less. He could have got the Medal of Honor for all I care, the fact is when it came to Iraq he was too much of a chickenshit to do his duty OR take his punishment. So your point is null. He went AWOL for no good reason.

 

I don't know how the US treats their prisoners. If the guards have the same mentality as you, I don't imagine it would be "usual" or all that "nice". Prison isn't supposed to be a nice place, but there is such a thing as prisoners rights. I imagine the military would be especially tough on deserters given the need for soliders at the moment, so I again imagine that they'd want to make going AWOL as undesirable as possible. So if there are certain unwritten rules about, say, raping prisoners, depriving them of sleep/other torture methods, etc. then that could qualify under cruel and unusual.

 

So you're citing unwritten rules that don't exist to US military prisoners. I guess that makes sense.

 

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/Columnists/Toronto/Michele_Mandel/2004/12/05/765951.html

 

But let's call every story I post lies, and every story you post truth. I don't want to disturb any view of the world you have where people who don't want to kill other people or be killed themselves are "pussies".

 

Massey? That guy's tales of civillian massacres gets taller, and stupider, every time he tells it. The guy does have PTSD, which is a very real and very common occurance among veterans, but the fact is he's being plastered all over left-wing rags for telling more and more outrageous unverifiable tales that people who jerk off at every American casualty love to read. I hope he gets over his disorder, but I can't say I have much love for a guy who, very very likely, practically makes up stories to see his name and picture in some rags.

 

If you'd like, I can give you the email of my brother in law in Iraq. He'll tell you all aobut his stay or would you rather read about it in some shit paper or magazine written by a person whose closest brush with combat was a fist fight over the price of his/her soy latte?

 

I thought so.

 

He said his childs birth put him over. His kid is 2 1/2. He enrolled in 2001. It's 2004. It's kinda, sorta, maybe, a lil bit, possible that the kid was born after basic.

 

Allow me to quote from the article:

 

During his extensive military training, Hinzman found himself chanting, "Train to kill, kill we will!" with his fellow soldiers until his voice went hoarse, and also yelling, "What makes the grass grow? Blood, blood, bright, red blood!" while repeatedly plunging a bayonet through a dummy.

 

All of this, he explained, was meant to desensitize soldiers and to dehumanize their enemies, so that killing them would be "as easy as shooting beer cans."

 

Somehow, he said, it just didn't seem right.

 

It appears, in this article anyway, he was getting his moral qualms in basic, which is what I was replying too.

 

First he applied for reassignment in a non-combat role... twice... this wasn't just a spur-of-the-moment decision. Wait, sorry, I forgot I'm conforming to your view on things... THAT FUCKING PUSSY! KILL LIKE A MAN, YOU LIL BITCH!

 

I don't know his MOS but since they refer to him as a "paratrooper" I'm going to guess he was an infantryman. Maybe, when he was having all those qualms in basic, he should not have put in for a combat role to begin with. What did he expect as an infantryman? He would sit around and drink beer in Afghanistan?

 

Because he didn't want to be away from his family any more than he already did? Oh, that's another pussy reason. Sorry.

 

Give me a break. You think anyone relishes leaving their family? No. But every man and woman in Iraq did it because it was their duty and their job. It's a horrible sacrifice that our men and women don't want to make but do. He didn't want to. He signed the same contract they did, swore the same oath they did, got the same money they did, but when push came to shove he didn't want to give up what they did.

 

You call that normal. I call that selfish.

 

I'd say its a disgrace of the freedom that military is supposedly "defending" to lock him up for not wanting to be a killer.

 

Don't want to be a killer? Don't be a cop and don't join the military.

 

Perhaps I just don't get the mentality behind this. Canada doesn't generally have war films, it's not really in our culture. I don't have any family in the military. I respect and appreciate what it takes to be in the armed services, so much so that I know I'd suck so much ass in it. So perhaps I can identify more with someone who doesn't feel right in it, than someone who is readily willing to pick up a gun and kill. I get why they must be imprisoned for deserting, but I don't get why it's such a disgrace to say "I don't want to do this". All these people are doing is becoming a regular citizen again. They never hurt anyone, they didn't turn on their country by affiliating with the enemy, they just didn't want to do something which takes a shitload of balls. That doesn't make them gutless or cowards, it just makes them normal. A cowardly thing to do would be if you're being invaded by another country and you're running away to another country - there really isn't a "choice" in that matter, it's something you have to do. But when you're part of the invaders, then it becomes a choice.

 

I don't hold not joining the military against you or anybody. If this guy said "I'm not going to join the military because I don't believe in killing", much like you are, nobody would care. This guy SIGNED UP for this. This may not mean much to you, but when you sign that contract, when you take that oath, when you don that uniform you are not only legally bound you are HONOR bound to do what your superiors tell you to do within the limits of the constitution. Period. If you don't have the cajones, hey, no problem. Nobody will think less of you, just don't sign up. But DON'T expect to become part of 200 years of history and then run to mommy when the military asks you to do something you don't want to do, namely leave your family, or fight in a war that's far away.

 

Actually, he probably didn't know he was getting into. When he enlisted the US wasn't in a combat situation and certainly not in a combat situation with Iraq (if we are to assume he signed up in a post-9/11 impulse (which wasn't stated, but is a possibility) that is _still_ different than going into Iraq). And if it wasn't, sure there is always the possibility of going into war at any moment, but then that is weighed against the probability of going to war.

 

"Oh when I signed up I didn't actually expect to fight! Now that the possibility is real I've magically become opposed to fighting!"

 

Give me a break.

 

A lot of his decision to flee up north was family-based, so Canada probably looked more attractive than France, or jail for that matter. Can't blame em. Of course, I wouldn't be in that position in the first place, so I can certainly see that side of the argument of lying in the bed you made. I just don't think the use of the word "coward" is appropriate here. If it were maybe 3 months, then I'd probably be with ya on this. A year, with the probable treatment you'd be getting? No thanks.

 

So owning up to your punishment is ok if you don't have a family and if its light.

 

Give me a break. I've said this multiple times, if having a family was a "get out of contract/jail free card" there wouldn't be anybody deployed anywhere. It's a sacrifice you must be willing to make. If sign up and you're not willing to make it you're selfish. End of story.

 

Canada's military history is something that we look at as "hey, that's cool", but we certainly don't look at it like the US does and it isn't engrained into our culture like it is in the states. Winning the Gold in the Olympics in Hockey probably instills more nationalistic pride than our war efforts... Actually, my Grandfather was in the Air Force, now that I think of it.

 

It's too bad since Canada has a proud military history as KR pointed out and I have.

[Justice 0]

Actually, he probably didn't know he was getting into.  When he enlisted the US wasn't in a combat situation and certainly not in a combat situation with Iraq (if we are to assume he signed up in a post-9/11 impulse (which wasn't stated, but is a possibility) that is _still_ different than going into Iraq).  And if it wasn't, sure there is always the possibility of going into war at any moment, but then that is weighed against the probability of going to war.

No offense, but that's your own stupidity, then. If you go into the military not expecting to ever fight, you are truly out there. If he defense is "I didn't read the fine print" then the judge should honestly smack him for being an ass.

 

Not only that, I don't find the "He signed up for Afganistan" thing, either. If you signed up during the post 9/11 rush, you signed up to fight. Simple as that. You can't just say "Well, I'm only gonna be here until Afganistan and then I'm done." Sorry, when you sign up, it tends to be a bit longer, and you generally don't get to pick and choose where you go. That's just how it is, and I'd hope he'd understand that.

 

A lot of his decision to flee up north was family-based, so Canada probably looked more attractive than France, or jail for that matter. Can't blame em. Of course, I wouldn't be in that position in the first place, so I can certainly see that side of the argument of lying in the bed you made. I just don't think the use of the word "coward" is appropriate here. If it were maybe 3 months, then I'd probably be with ya on this. A year, with the probable treatment you'd be getting? No thanks.

 

Man, when you are asking asylum from the military authorities, it doesn't help your case. When you are releasing stories and creating headlines like this, making ripples in the wave pool, the military doesn't enjoy it. I think it was a self-serving move to try and appeal to the Canadian Government because he obviously wanted to get off scot-free. That's what I consider cowardly.

 

And, to be honest, I'm sure he'd get a bunch more respect in prison for facing his sentence like a man rather than trying to run away to Canada and smear the military. You are right; he made his own bed, now time it's time to lie in it.

[Guest INXS]

Having joined the armed forces it is his duty to do whatever the chain of command ask of him regardless as to whether he morally agrees with it or not. His best course of action would have been to simply refuse to go to Iraq and get himself discharged rather than running away.

 

Without knowing the individual personally, it's difficult to tell whether he genuinely feels strongly against the illegal Iraq war or simply doesn't fancy going to work in a warzone for the forseeable future.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

Thank you. Even if he was protesting the war, the way he went about it doesn't accomplish anything.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

I'm mixed on this. I'm against it because I'm afraid to see it start some kind of a trend, but at the same time I'm for it because I hope it starts some kind of a trend.

[Guest CronoT]

The truth is, a lot of people just aren't cut out for the military; myself included. I may play a lot of military video games, and study about military history and weaponry, but the thought of actually going out with the pure intent of killing someone is abhorrent to me.

 

Also, here are a few things to consider:

 

Army historian S.L.A. Marshall stirred up a great controversy soon after WW2, when he released his book "Men Against Fire". After interviewing hundreds of combat riflemen, both from the Army and Marines, Marshall concluded that only 25%, or one man in four, even fired his weapon during a battle. Many American WW2 combat vets have vehemently disputed that figure. But Army Brass took it seriously enough to revise recruit training in the late 1940's. During the war in Korea, the percentage of soldiers who fired allegedly increased significantly due to this revised training. "Men Against Fire" was reprinted by the University of Oklahoma Press in 2000. For those interested in reading Marshall's opinions, it is available again, for the first time in many years.

 

Source: http://www.101airborneww2.com/warstories6.html

 

In response to that, this happened:

 

The state has harnessed not only technology to make more powerful weapons but also the science of psychology to make more soldiers more effective killers. Most men will avoid killing if at all possible. After World War II, S. L. A. Marshall and his team interviewed hundreds of American soldiers. They found, unexpectedly, that only one in five in frontline combat actually fired their rifles. The analysis of what it takes to kill in war has been pursued further by Dave Grossman in his recent book On Killing. There is quite a bit of evidence from various wars that most soldiers avoid killing at all costs, even at the risk of being killed themselves. By reconstructing old battles in which soldiers with muskets fired at each other for hours standing in lines only a few dozen meters apart, analysts have determined that most of them who fired intended to miss (by shooting over the heads of the enemy), leading to very low hit rates. The closer one is to another person, physically and emotionally, the harder it is to kill them, and the greater the psychological trauma from doing so. Most of the killing in infantry battles is caused by artillery and machine guns, not direct engagement by infantry with rifles.

 

Western militaries took notice of Marshall's findings and used insights from psychology to improve killing rates, as described in Peter Watson's book War on the Mind. They found that the greatest incentive to kill came not from ideology, hatred of the enemy or fear of being killed, but from loyalty to the immediate fighting group. Relevant factors in military training are recruitment at an impressionable age, training to hate and dehumanise the enemy, training to obey authority, and peer pressure. However, this is still not enough to make most men fire in battle. The extra factor needed is conditioning, against based on insights from psychology. As Grossman puts it, the "procedure of precisely rehearsing and mimicking a killing action is an excellent way of ensuring that the individual is capable of performing the act in combat."

 

For example, the easiest way to damage someone with one's hand involves sticking one's thumb through the person's eye into the brain and moving the thumb around. This is abhorrent to most people, even to think about. To train soldiers in this killing technique, one karate instructor has students practise using oranges taped over the opponent's eye. Similarly, rather than shooting at traditional targets, soldiers are trained to shoot at pictures of enemy troops that pop up unexpectedly and destruct realistically when hit. After conditioning of this sort, the soldier performs on "automatic pilot" in the actual combat situation. Use of these techniques raised the firing rate of US soldiers from 20% in World War II to over 90% in the Vietnam war.

 

Source: http://www.uow.edu.au/arts/sts/bmartin/pubs/98gl.html

 

Some people go into the Armed Forces, thinking it will be a noble duty, or something like that. But, once they go into a protracted conflict, they quickly learn the truth of what General William Tecumseh Sherman said: "War is hell."

 

Source: http://www.mi5th.org/warishell.htm

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

And let's also consider this. The guy could've gotten a non-combat position in the army. One of my friends went to Iraq and he never saw a battlefield while he was there.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

Well, we won't know until February, but my hunch is that he is going to be refused refugee status.

[Guest Cerebus]

Crono T,

 

What's your point? That the military dehumanizes recruits, forces teamwork, and develops *GASP* combat reflexes?

 

What do you EXPECT them to develop? Cappucino-sipping-while-reading-Chomsky skills? If you don't shoot, you endanger your mission, endanger yourself, and endanger the other people in your units. The mission of a military is to kill people and break things. If you can't do it, then don't sign up. If you DO sign up, especially for a combat MOS, expect to do it otherwise stay away. And with the elimination of "rear areas" and the increasing absence of "front lines" expect to do it if you're not in a combat MOS either.

 

And citing SLA Marshall? If you don't know the problem of citing Marshall then you obviously need more education on this.

[Your Paragon of Virtue 0]

If you'd like, I can give you the email of my brother in law in Iraq. He'll tell you all aobut his stay or would you rather read about it in some shit paper or magazine written by a person whose closest brush with combat was a fist fight over the price of his/her soy latte?

 

That one made me laugh, if only due to how ridiculous it sounded, heh. Soy latte? Two liberal stereotypes with one stone!

 

EDIT: Hey Mike, what do you have to say about all this? Your insight is definitely missed. Lay down the law!