Why haven't I heard of this guy before?Follow

Conscientious Rejector?
I've gotta say, I always thought it took a particular kind of person to be a firefighter, policeman, soldier, to go in and do a job without thinking too deeply about the parameters. Sure, you might pull a rapist out of a burning building, have to put a woman in jail for finally hitting her abusive husband back, or go to war for something you don't think is right. Still, I can't in good conscience deny this guy's position seems well thought-out and heartfelt. God Bless him, man. I can't help but respect him.

Coming from you, that's saying something.

I'm not banking on hope. I'm gonna crochet him a binkie.

Merry Court-Martial to him.

Some guy catches a fish and trades it to another guy who chops down some wood. And these guys calling themselves the US Government come along and want a piece of the action. And you can't help but disrespect the fisher and the logger. There's no sympathy left. Embrace fascism or be fried in the flames. War is action. Too bad it isn't the particular fascism you want.

lol ok... yes be facist like Hitler! oh he was a great one wasnt he? look what he did for poland! he gave poland the oprotunity to become part of the great country of Germany! oooh it was a great vision, i mean who doesnt want a world of blonde haired blue eyed women!?!

Given my HUGELY anti war in iraq stance, i have often wondered if i would have had the moral fiber to do the same, probably not.

Good luck to him.

yes I would assume he has a right to challenge those orders and I am sure there there is a process to doing that. Did he follow process or did he just not report?

what did public opinion have to do with voting yes to go to war against iraq. all of the quotes from the democrates was iraq has mass weapons of destruction. and thus voted yes.

if public opinion was what we went on I think we would be in saudi arabia

Challenge illegal orders? Oh so we can refuse to pay taxes? Deduct out that portion which finances the military leviathan? Deduct any portion for anything we disagree with the way the money is used or the method in which it is "collected"?

Like I said, the sympathy is all used up. Those who cry about the Iraq war support just another particular form of fascism. All it would take for those pansies to call tax collection an illegal war too would be for some more Timothy McVeighs to more regularly blow up irs buildings.

I hear that beating a good 'ol Merriam Webster against your head repeatedly yields good results.

Insert obvious "brow-beating" and "beat-it-into-your-head" jokes here.

In a military court no, i would imagine he would stand a reasonable chance in a civillian court though.

Just because he went against Military law does not make him morally wrong though.

He is making an ethical choice concerning a decision by his country he considers unethical (also known as "illegal" under human rights laws), not a legal one (in the laws on the books sense). He looks like a bright lad, I am sure he knew the consequences of his decision and is willing to suffer for it (although, like anyone, I am also sure he would rather not).

Edit: needed to clarify



Edited, Jan 3rd 2007 4:38pm by GitSlayer

Yup.

Except that he and he alone is not the arbiter of what is and is not "illegal" in *any* sense. He's certainly free to consider the decision to be unethical, but that's his own personal choice. I'm not sure how you leap from him making that determination on his own to it being "illegal under human rights laws". That's an absurd requirement.

Are you seriously trying to say that if any one single individual disagrees with a decision made by a government that this makes the decision "illegal" under humran rights laws (whatever those are)? Ridiculous. It's not "illegal" in any way at all. He signed a contract. He decided after the fact that he didn't want to follow the terms of the contract he signed. He's the one in violation of the law.


And yeah. Nobby's right. He's supposed to question illegal orders. And if you can find where it says in the constitution that a soldier being ordered to fight after the Congress has declared war (in this case authorized force under the war powers act), he might have a point. The fact is that Congress did vote. They did decide to send us to war. You can disagree with that decision all day long. You can question it. You can second guess it. But it is "legal". And therefore any order deriving from that decision is also legal.

He's not "bright". He's not someone to emulate or admire. He's a total freaking idiot who should never have put a uniform on in the first place. Clearly, he had no intention of ever fullfilling the duty he promised to do when he put it on in the first place. He's a disgrace to every soldier who has put that uniform on and fought and died for their country.

Edited, Jan 3rd 2007 2:19pm by gbaji